Le Batard, Deadspin, the HOF vote

Double J · Jan 8, 2014

MileHigh said:

Dan has a radio show. And a TV show. And sometimes writes (very well, in my opinion) for a major metro (as previously noted that I worked at and with Dan). How much more of a platform does he need to "expose the flaws" in the system?

Clown move.
Click to expand...

From a clown, big surprise.

MileHigh · Jan 8, 2014

Double J said:

MileHigh said:

Dan has a radio show. And a TV show. And sometimes writes (very well, in my opinion) for a major metro (as previously noted that I worked at and with Dan). How much more of a platform does he need to "expose the flaws" in the system?

Clown move.
Click to expand...

From a clown, big surprise.
Click to expand...

Who you calling a clown?

Double J · Jan 8, 2014

MileHigh said:

Double J said:

MileHigh said:

Dan has a radio show. And a TV show. And sometimes writes (very well, in my opinion) for a major metro (as previously noted that I worked at and with Dan). How much more of a platform does he need to "expose the flaws" in the system?

Clown move.
Click to expand...

From a clown, big surprise.
Click to expand...

Who you calling a clown?
Click to expand...

Lol, not you.

Ace · Jan 8, 2014

I think Hall of Fame voting is a joke. That said, I don't see how Dan got the upper hand here.

BDC99 · Jan 8, 2014

Michael_ Gee said:

Dan shouldn't have done this. If he had solicited a public vote on his multiple media platforms, I as a BBWAA member would have no problem with it (others would). But to allow Deadspin to use his anonymity to gleefully imply some writer sold his or her vote to it was sleazy, or being a conspirator in sleaze after the fact, I guess. It's not as if he needed this stunt to get MORE attention. He's on TV every goddamn day.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure he could have pulled that off. If he was publicly soliciting votes, I would guess the BBWAA would have shut him down and/or not counted his vote. So Deadspin did the dirty work. Like I said, I don't think this was his idea, and he just saw it as a look-at-me opportunity.

Michael_ Gee · Jan 8, 2014

The BBWAA can't censor a member. If a columnist says tell me who you think should be in the Hall and I'll vote for them to his or her readers, that's no skin off the organization's nose. Some wouldn't like it, but some like me wouldn't mind. It's hardly a monolithic group.

outofplace · Jan 8, 2014

Joe Williams said:

Dick Whitman said:

Whatever. A pro athlete could shoot an umpire in the head over a called strike three, and we all know that Le Batard would be the first to rationalize it.

Also, I think that "moralizing" is become too easy of a fallback critique, even though I've used it myself - used it on Alma on this board, for example. Isn't it OK to "moralize" sometimes? Are we never to judge integrity or character or, even taking traits out of the equation, the ethics of particular acts? Why even have a court system then? And, obviously, a HOF vote isn't a court system. But why have rules at all, in any arena, if we're prohibited from levying consequences?
Click to expand...

Le Batard is unfailingly the athlete's defender, almost to the point of "no matter what." Player = good, any other critic, authority or opposing force = bad.

Not surprised he'd be a "PEDS & the more, the merrier" advocate.

As for the "moralizing," Dick, we're raising generations now that cannot stand the concept of judging or being judged. They've all been given trophies just for showing up. They're made to walk on eggshells over others' feelings at all times as the highest ideal. Some kids feel pressure not to excel lest they separate themselves from the pack and cause others to feel bad (though we tolerate meritocracy in sports, almost exclusively). "Everything is gray and no one truly can walk in another's shoes," so it's all relativism, all the time. Institutions must sublimate themselves to each and every individual, a reversal of times when individuals would want to aspire to the institution's guidelines and ideals.

And while those who see things that way are entitled to their opinions, in my experience, it makes their heads explode that others would dare hold a contrary view. They cannot handle dissent from their staked-out positions.

Well, too bad. We're all being judged. In the big way and in a bunch of little ways. That ought to motivate us, not aggravate us.
Click to expand...

Tell us again that you aren't determined to punish PED users. The more you post stuff like this, the more we know you just aren't being honest about that.

Steak Snabler · Jan 8, 2014

Lost in all this is that the 10 guys Deadspin fans voted for were a pretty damn good collection of deserving Hall of Famers:

Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, Tom Glavine, Mike Piazza, Craig Biggio, Edgar Martinez, Jeff Bagwell, Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Curt Schilling

I'd put Tim Raines ahead of Edgar or Schilling, but otherwise, that's exactly the group I'd have voted for.

Investigator Gary · Jan 8, 2014

Good for him. Hopefully the other gasbag voters get pissed off enough to make fools of themselves out of this whole ordeal.

BDC99 · Jan 8, 2014

Steak Snabler said:

Lost in all this is that the 10 guys Deadspin fans voted for were a pretty damn good collection of deserving Hall of Famers:

Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, Tom Glavine, Mike Piazza, Craig Biggio, Edgar Martinez, Jeff Bagwell, Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Curt Schilling

I'd put Tim Raines ahead of Edgar or Schilling, but otherwise, that's exactly the group I'd have voted for.
Click to expand...

Yep. They were the top 10 in the final voting. Can't fault the result. Still not sure how I really feel about LeBatard's choice. And I wonder if there will be any fallout considering that his bosses at ESPN apparently did not know about it.

playthrough · Jan 8, 2014

Michael_ Gee said:

Dan shouldn't have done this. If he had solicited a public vote on his multiple media platforms, I as a BBWAA member would have no problem with it (others would). But to allow Deadspin to use his anonymity to gleefully imply some writer sold his or her vote to it was sleazy, or being a conspirator in sleaze after the fact, I guess. It's not as if he needed this stunt to get MORE attention. He's on TV every goddamn day.
Click to expand...

I had no idea he was on TV, and I'm proud of that.

And good point from TigerVols about generating traffic for a competitor. Pretty basic journalism no-no. Though the j-word is woefully out of place in this discussion.

BDC99 · Jan 8, 2014

playthrough said:

Michael_ Gee said:

Dan shouldn't have done this. If he had solicited a public vote on his multiple media platforms, I as a BBWAA member would have no problem with it (others would). But to allow Deadspin to use his anonymity to gleefully imply some writer sold his or her vote to it was sleazy, or being a conspirator in sleaze after the fact, I guess. It's not as if he needed this stunt to get MORE attention. He's on TV every goddamn day.
Click to expand...

I had no idea he was on TV, and I'm proud of that.
Click to expand...

I wish I didn't know that. Might be the worst show ever put on ESPN. Worse than SportsNation, Numbers Never Lie and in a tight race with the thankfully very-short-lived Unite.

Log in or Sign up

Le Batard, Deadspin, the HOF vote

Double J Active Member

MileHigh Moderator Staff Member

Double J Active Member

Ace Well-Known Member

BDC99 Well-Known Member

Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

Steak Snabler Well-Known Member

Investigator Gary New Member

BDC99 Well-Known Member

playthrough Moderator Staff Member

BDC99 Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Le Batard, Deadspin, the HOF vote

Double J Active Member

MileHigh Moderator Staff Member

Double J Active Member

Ace Well-Known Member

BDC99 Well-Known Member

Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

Steak Snabler Well-Known Member

Investigator Gary New Member

BDC99 Well-Known Member

playthrough Moderator Staff Member

BDC99 Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches