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

[BoSoxLady]

Shank also referred to Ortiz as a "piece of junk" on Sports Final, hosted by Bob Lobel. Shank eventually apologized (on air) but it was a long time after the original remark.

Notice that he claims Ortiz mentioned "talk shows" if that lets CHB off the hook when in fact, he spouts the same insulting shit on a regular basis on 98.5.

He's a total a-hole.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Ortiz has no leverage? He's got the Sox ownership in his corner, the most important leverage of all. 

 

[teddykgb]

It seems like Shaughnessy has taken this whole "owned by the team" thing as license to go full on extra douchebag, almost like a dare that Henry can't silence him without making an ass of himself.

 

[Harry Hooper]

It seems like Shaughnessy has taken this whole "owned by the team" thing as license to go full on extra douchebag, almost like a dare that Henry can't silence him without making an ass of himself.

 
 
From the recent Boston Mag article on John Henry:
 
After Henry bought Liverpool FC in 2010, Globe sports columnist Dan Shaughnessy made a habit in his column of asking whether he was spread too thin to effectively run the Red Sox (in case you’re wondering, [Globe editor] McGrory says Shaughnessy has “the safest job in New England”). Now Henry has the Red Sox, Liverpool, and the Globe.

 

[joyofsox]

If Henry can silence CHB, far from making an ass of himself, he will instead attain that rarefied air to which Pedro was elevated when he tossed the Gerbl to the ground.

 

[joe dokes]

If Henry can silence CHB, far from making an ass of himself, he will instead attain that rarefied air to which Pedro was elevated when he tossed the Gerbl to the ground.

 
I have little doubt that John Henry is a smarter man than Dan Shaughnessy.  As such, Henry knows that the *best* way to "deal with" Shaughnessy isn't to silence him, but to give him even more exposure. The more he speaks and writes, the more he is exposed as an irrelevant, credibility-less caricature of a tough-guy sports columnist;  and the more obvious it becomes that he no longer really has any actual insights on sports to offer, but he instead trolls readers with over-the-top idiocy that 95% of the time he may not even believe.  Incite is an easier task for the lazy man than insight.
 
Sunshine remains the best disinfectant.  Henry should order his employee Shaughnessy to write 5 columns a day.

 

[Reverend]

 
I believe Dan's comments were related to a poor postseason Ortiz had with the Twins.
 
In any case, it shows what kind of character Shank has to make a personal attack on a player in public like that. It's one thing to say you think a player isn't very good; it's quite another to call him a "giant sack of you-know-what." That brings a level of personal animosity to the proceedings.
 
In any case, Shank's a fossil and the sooner we stop paying attention to his columns and thoughts the sooner he'll go away. He's already irrelevant.

 
Probably, but I also found this:

This is the same Shaughnessy who referred to Ortiz as a "giant sack of you-know-what" when the Sox signed him as a free agent heading into 2004. It was meant as a slam on Theo Epstein's GM capabilities. An astute baseball mind, that Dan Shaughnessy.
 

 
I think that scans. I somehow had never heard about this but wow. How do some of these guys not realize you get more credibility when you go, "My bad--I was wrong about that one"? Ortiz might be the most fortuitous pick up in recent MLB history.

 

[smastroyin]

Ortiz was signed heading into 2003.  I think the date from that blog is also wrong, Ortiz was signed on the 22nd of January.
 
But yes, it was about Epstein's abilities.  Remember this is after the Billy Beane thing and with the ownership still under fire for the way they got the team.  I believe Shank was a huge fan of Frank McCourt.  So he was like, at least doubly wrong.  Shank also panned Mueller as a JAG.  

 

[PedroKsBambino]

If Henry can silence CHB, far from making an ass of himself, he will instead attain that rarefied air to which Pedro was elevated when he tossed the Gerbl to the ground.

 
Agreed.  I also suspect Henry has enough confidence in his reputation around town to boot Shaughnessy if he cares to and manage the reaction later.  Because, let's face it---at the end of the day Henry brought three titles here, owns the most iconic place and team in town, and buys ink by the bucket.  If he wants to boot CHB, he'll do it and eventually win the media battle, too.

 

[nattysez]

Have there been any further details about what happened between chb and Ortiz yesterday? All I've seen was a blurb from Edes.

 

[joe dokes]

Have there been any further details about what happened between chb and Ortiz yesterday? All I've seen was a blurb from Edes.

 
wasnt that the entirety of shaughnessy column yesterday?

 

[TheoShmeo]

As much as I dislike Dan, I'd hate to see Henry fire him.  Make no mistake, I'd love him to be gone.  He's a talented writer who too often takes the easy way out (today's vacuous column is a great example of that) and his consistent "look at me" focus is beyond tiresome.
 
But if Henry fires the CHB, it will look awful.  Sox Owner Quells Dissent.  Sox Owner Censors Press.  The stories will write themselves.  And the sanctimony will be off the charts and annoying.  Worse, Dan will be turned into a sympathetic figure and a victim.  Shades of Dempter making A-Rod on the side of the angels for about 48 hours.
 
I can't see Henry taking that chance...even with the mass amount of good will he's stored up with those three gorgeous titles.

 

[Reverend]

I dunno. I don't read Shaughnessy, but I think I would love the civil war that would ensue as the Peter Kings of the world line up with Shank and the Deadspins against him.
 
I think it might bring into high relief who is really producing the higher level content after all.

 

[Rovin Romine]

As much as I dislike Dan, I'd hate to see Henry fire him.  Make no mistake, I'd love him to be gone.  He's a talented writer who too often takes the easy way out (today's vacuous column is a great example of that) and his consistent "look at me" focus is beyond tiresome.
 
But if Henry fires the CHB, it will look awful.  Sox Owner Quells Dissent.  Sox Owner Censors Press.  The stories will write themselves.  And the sanctimony will be off the charts and annoying.  Worse, Dan will be turned into a sympathetic figure and a victim.  Shades of Dempter making A-Rod on the side of the angels for about 48 hours.
 
I can't see Henry taking that chance...even with the mass amount of good will he's stored up with those three gorgeous titles.

 
HS football always needs good coverage.  

 

[DJnVa]

Wouldn't the Herald scoop him up if he was fired?

 

[terrisus]

But if Henry fires the CHB, it will look awful. Sox Owner Quells Dissent. Sox Owner Censors Press. The stories will write themselves. And the sanctimony will be off the charts and annoying. Worse, Dan will be turned into a sympathetic figure and a victim.

 
Henry fires incompetant Baseball writer.
Henry removes clubhouse cancer.

 

[twibnotes]

Best scenario would be Henry bringing on a brutal boss to ride Shank extra hard. Picturing a guy like "pig vomit" in "Private Parts" (played by Paul Giammatti)

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Wouldn't the Herald scoop him up if he was fired?

 
Quite possibly.  But the reason you fire him is because you think he is bad for your brand, not because he's critical of your team so I think you'd be fine with the Herald trotting him out there

 

[joyofsox]

August 2010 Interview:
 
Dayn Perry: Do you miss Dan Shaughnessy?
 
Pedro Martinez: No, no, no. That's the only thing I don't miss about Boston.
 
 

 

[Sampo Gida]

 
I have little doubt that John Henry is a smarter man than Dan Shaughnessy.  As such, Henry knows that the *best* way to "deal with" Shaughnessy isn't to silence him, but to give him even more exposure. The more he speaks and writes, the more he is exposed as an irrelevant, credibility-less caricature of a tough-guy sports columnist;  and the more obvious it becomes that he no longer really has any actual insights on sports to offer, but he instead trolls readers with over-the-top idiocy that 95% of the time he may not even believe.  Incite is an easier task for the lazy man than insight.
 
Sunshine remains the best disinfectant.  Henry should order his employee Shaughnessy to write 5 columns a day.

 
I agree with your first 2 points.  Not so much the reasons for them.
 
The main reason JWH needs someone like Shaugnessy is to provide credibility to the rest of the Globe staff who may be more, how to say it, easily controlled or sympathetic when things go wrong.   If you want to counter people who may be inclined to say that the Globe is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Red Sox, what better way to do it than with someone like Shaughnessy to take shots at them. Also, many of the enlightened do not take him seriously anyways, even on the rare occasions that he is right. It's long been known that the best way to crush a negative story that actually has merits is not to prevent it from being written, but to have it written first by a known fruitcake.   Shaugnessy serves a similar purpose.  And while trolling may have a bad name, it sells papers and gets hits on the internet.  Win-Win for JWH,

 

[Reverend]

 
I agree with your first 2 points.  Not so much the reasons for them.
 
The main reason JWH needs someone like Shaugnessy is to provide credibility to the rest of the Globe staff who may be more, how to say it, easily controlled or sympathetic when things go wrong.   If you want to counter people who may be inclined to say that the Globe is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Red Sox, what better way to do it than with someone like Shaughnessy to take shots at them. Also, many of the enlightened do not take him seriously anyways, even on the rare occasions that he is right. It's long been known that the best way to crush a negative story that actually has merits is not to prevent it from being written, but to have it written first by a known fruitcake.   Shaugnessy serves a similar purpose.  And while trolling may have a bad name, it sells papers and gets hits on the internet.  Win-Win for JWH,

 
This is insipid.
 
I know we strive to give better reasons here beyond just saying something is stupid, but this is... 
 
I'm going to bed.

 

[richgedman'sghost]

 
This is insipid.
 
I know we strive to give better reasons here beyond just saying something is stupid, but this is... 
 
I'm going to bed.

Sweet dreams of sugar plums and more titles in your head.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Awful Announcing with an evisceration of Shank and his opposition to analytics in sports.

http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2014/march/guess-which-columnist-is-trolling-analytics-once-again.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

[terrisus]

Awful Announcing with an evisceration of Shank and his opposition to analytics in sports.

http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2014/march/guess-which-columnist-is-trolling-analytics-once-again.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Dan Shaughnessy is fighting a war that simply doesn't exist.

That sums up his entire career very well - creating wars where none should exist.

 

[JimD]

If anyone ever wants to teach their middle-school English student the meaning of a 'straw man argument', Shank provides a classic example in that column:
 

Information is good.  Every sports team can benefit from data. But why do I feel like there are people who want to erase all scouting and experience from sports?

 
Who are the influential sports media people out there that are arguing against scouting and 'experience' (whatever that means to Dan)?  What successful sports organizations have completely eliminated their scouting departments?  It's a shame that there aren't any successful teams in Boston that are on the cutting edge of analytics that, you know, Dan could go and visit and see what's actually going on.
 
Good luck with that Globe paywall plan, Mr. Henry.

 

[nattysez]

If anyone ever wants to teach their middle-school English student the meaning of a 'straw man argument', Shank provides a classic example in that column:
 
 
 
 
Who are the influential sports media people out there that are arguing against scouting and 'experience' (whatever that means to Dan)?  What successful sports organizations have completely eliminated their scouting departments?  It's a shame that there aren't any successful teams in Boston that are on the cutting edge of analytics that, you know, Dan could go and visit and see what's actually going on.
 
Good luck with that Globe paywall plan, Mr. Henry.

 
FWIW, Bruce Jenkins, when making points similar to Shank's, has cited Brian Kenny as someone who insists that "you shouldn't trust your eyes" when doing player evaluations.  Kenny has done quite a bit of damage to the public perception of analytics in an ill-fated bid to get ratings for MLB Network.

 

[joe dokes]

Anybody else think that Shaughnessy's shout-out to coaches the other day to play the scrubeenies more during blowouts was a sop to the Celtics' Pagliuca, whose son sits at the end of the Duke bench and has played 5 minutes all season, including being stapled to the bench in more than one 30-point blowout win?

 

[JimBoSox9]

Brian Kenny is awesome on MLBN.  You're outta your mind.

 

[Reverend]

If anyone ever wants to teach their middle-school English student the meaning of a 'straw man argument', Shank provides a classic example in that column:
 
Who are the influential sports media people out there that are arguing against scouting and 'experience' (whatever that means to Dan)?  What successful sports organizations have completely eliminated their scouting departments?  It's a shame that there aren't any successful teams in Boston that are on the cutting edge of analytics that, you know, Dan could go and visit and see what's actually going on.
 
Good luck with that Globe paywall plan, Mr. Henry.

 
Even if you too the advanced statistics and analytics as the end all be all of player evaluation, the teams do not have much if not most of the data they use in evaluating high school, college, or minor players, or for the younger players in MLB. So even if you accept the premise--which nobody does--that advanced statistics and analytics or the only correct way to understand how to maximize winning in baseball, you would still need scouts to go find the guys with the "kind of game" that you want for your strategy.
 
It also misses the newer developments in analytics pointing us back towards actual play that requires good old fashioned scouting and coaching. On the Sox, for example, Butterfield understands the advanced hitting scouting reports and goes over the various slices of the infield with players in thinking about how to field in shifts. Pittsburgh is working to get pitchers and infielders on the same page to maximize ground balls. 
 
In other words, many of the new analytics, far from moving people away from game play into abstraction are moving the focus back on a deeper thinking of the mechanics of physical play. Of course, some are too busy whining about analytics to know this. So yeah, it's a rarefied kind of strawman where he doesn't even know about what it is he doesn't know about what he's talking about; it's second order ignorance.

 

[Brianish]

 
second order ignorance.

 
Is it too late to change the thread title?

 

[JimD]

You'd think that this guy would be an old-timey baseball guy's dream:
 

"Small infielder had a tremendous career at Arizona State.  Average power for a middle infielder, with good bat speed and excellent plate discipline.  Loves the game and has fantastic instincts.  Plays top-notch defense up the middle, named the 2003 National Defensive Player of the Year.  Very scrappy and a great teammate."

 
yet the statheads had him ranked higher (BA 53rd best player in 2004) than where he was drafted (65th overall).
 
Similarly, Kevin Youkilis seems like the kind of red-ass player that the traditional guys should love, but his major league potential was only recognized by the computer geeks.
 
Mike Salk actually had a good take on this on EEI the other day - by changing around just a few words in Shank's opening paragraph, he turned it 180 degrees around into a convincing critique of the traditionalists hangup on clutch and other hoary old beliefs.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

You'd think that this guy would be an old-timey baseball guy's dream:
 
 
 
 
yet the statheads had him ranked higher (BA 53rd best player in 2004) than where he was drafted (65th overall).
 
Similarly, Kevin Youkilis seems like the kind of red-ass player that the traditional guys should love, but his major league potential was only recognized by the computer geeks.
 
Mike Salk actually had a good take on this on EEI the other day - by changing around just a few words in Shank's opening paragraph, he turned it 180 degrees around into a convincing critique of the traditionalists hangup on clutch and other hoary old beliefs.

 
Youkilis was also the kind of fat-ass, "bad body" player that traditional scouts overlook.  Pedroia was deemed too short to be a big leaguer despite his performance.  As Billy Beane famously chided in Moneyball "we're not selling jeans", yet scouts will often base their player evaluations on things that would be better suited for jean model searches.

 

[TheoShmeo]

The Curly Haired Bitch turned in a rather annoying column this morning.  Among other things, he said Boston would not overreact to the opening day loss AND that Wednesday's game is now a must win.  Perhaps his tongue was firmly planted in his cheek when he typed those last words.  If so, fine, and my sarcasm meter needs work.  If not....

 

[Granite Sox]

It's sarcasm, for sure, but the INTENT is to annoy as many fans as possible.

 

[Dummy Hoy]

Please remember that he doesn't even like baseball anymore.

 

[Humphrey]

Before 2004 he would have written that and been serious about it.

 

[soxhop411]

Dan Shaughnessy ‏@Dan_Shaughnessy  17m
Wrote last spring that I'd shave my head if Ellsbury was with Sox in '14. Just thanked him for signing with Yanks. Hair is all I've got.
 
https://twitter.com/Dan_Shaughnessy/status/454360114699710465

 

[Leather]

"I had a chance to talk one-on-one with a popular and effective player that went from my readers' home town team to its arch rival.  
 
I used the opportunity to talk about my hair!"

 

[SydneySox]

I dunno, that was kind of funny in a deprecating way.
 
Guy's an asshole but let's not make this thread Abrahamesque.

 

[tims4wins]

Awful Announcing with an evisceration of Shank and his opposition to analytics in sports.

http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2014/march/guess-which-columnist-is-trolling-analytics-once-again.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 
Late to the party but
 

Sports trekkies.  Yes, that's a dismissive line used by a sports columnist in 2014.  That's rich, rich indeed.  I'm sure everyone left Sloan and went straight to the Comic Con next door and then they went back home to their mom's basements to play World of Warcraft for seven straight hours and write on online message boards about plot holes in Sharknado.

 
They nailed us.

 

[terrisus]

Yeah, hair is all he's got - if we couldn't call him CHB, we wouldn't really have any appropriate way to refer to him.
 
Well, I can think of some others, but they might get censored in some places.

 

[Shawn O'Leary]

We could go with Watto:
 

 

 

[SydneySox]

We could be he doesn't exist.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

We could be he doesn't exist.

 
There is no Scoop?

 

[Traut]

Wonderful Deadspin piece about Shank on soccer: 

Legendary old school troll Dan Shaughnessy has a real strong take in today's Boston Globeabout how soccer sucks. There is no way, he says, that the overbearing Futbol Moonies will make him for guilty for disliking the sport. Further, he says, it will never catch on in America, not least because there's no sense of progression toward goals and because you can't use your hands. Take that!
Now, here's where you say, "Jesus Christ, was this mailed in from 20 years ago?" and I say, "No, it was mailed in from 25 years ago!" Shank has, in fact, been writing this exact same column for longer than many of you have been alive. It's downright Reillyesque, as a quick review of some of the major themes in his soccer writing reveals.
 

 

[TheoShmeo]

I didin't like Shank's column on soccer.  Predictable and boring.
 
But I liked Ryan's sanctimonious load of manure about soccer (or anything for that matter) being the litmus test for proper sports fandom even less.  It's tough to be more insufferable than the CHB but Bob Ryan managed to be so on this topic...in my book, at least.

 

[bankshot1]

Shank's column was just another self-indulgent "look at me" piece. Seriously, who cares if he doesn't like soccer? Most of the world does and, despite Danny's protestations, is wholly indifferent to his choice of favorite ball.

 

[Reverend]

That's funny, because I saw Coming to America listed in my cable's guide the other day and it occurred to me that nobody invokes that ridiculous "don't use your hands" argument anymore.
 
I guess I was wrong.

 

[54thMA]

 
 It's tough to be more insufferable than the CHB but Bob Ryan managed to be so on this topic...in my book, at least.

 
Couldn't agree more, when are they going to put this overstuffed gas bag out to pasture
 

 

[Van Everyman]

This, pretty much:

http://screamer.deadspin.com/dan-shaughnessy-has-been-writing-the-same-soccer-column-1594470556?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow