Worthwhile Will Leitch essay on Bill Simmons

So what is your issue with him calling the decade a disaster?

Cocaine problems, 2 finals (Washington-Seattle that NO ONE wanted to watch, each getting abysmal ratings), fistfights every 5 minutes, tape-delayed playoff games, the merger (which made the game quite herky-jerky until the bumps were smoothed out), a fuct attempt at procuring a solid TV contract ... So, it's not exactly like it was a decade of decadence.

But again, Boom, read the book. His sourcing is more than adequate.

 

He admits that his sourcing was faulty.

Just curious and be honest -- how many games did you watch during the 70's?

 

Pretty much every book? I sure as hell hope not, and I refuse to accept that as a defence.

I have a non-fiction book coming out in a few months, and I sourced the shit out of it. If there's so much as one factual error in it, I'll be absolutely mortified.

 

I'm reading a book about female musicians in which guard Kenny Smith was described as playing for the Houston Astros.

 

Not many. But that doesn't validate your point because I happen to be 38 and started watching the game when I was 7 or 8.

Your vision of "disaster" doesn't match up with how Simmons is breaking the decade down, on every single level. Hell, don't even read the whole book. Just read the chunk of pulp in which he talks about the '70s.

If you think he's still full of shit, great, and I'll cease and desist from arguing this point with you.

 

Joe Morgan just called me and agrees that basketball in the 1970s was great, and so was baseball.

 

You're right, and it did sound a bit too flippant about errors. I have a nonfiction book and as far as I know there weren't any factual errors. I didn't hear about any. But not every book has a couple hundred thousand readers, like Simmons's basketball book does. If every book had that many readers, and devoted a website to document any errors anyone found, I'd think that a lot more mistakes would be discovered than anyone would think possible. And it does hurt the credibility, definitely. I wrote before that a friend of mine read The Echoing Green on my recommendation and started wondering about the entire book because of mistakes Prager made about a minor part of the book. And the amount of research Prager put into that book was staggering. But it still happened. So do we discount the entire book? Some people probably do. I don't, and do take things on a case by case basis. And in Simmons's case, I don't think the mistakes completely destroy the arguments he makes, especially about the 1970s, the most-discussed decade in NBA history on sportsjournalists.com

 

It's a fascinating decade from every angle he presents.

 

STG, what are some of the errors in Echoing Green? I thought that book was fantastic - and you're right, absolutely staggering research - and I most likely wouldn't discount the whole thing based on the errors. But I don't know what errors or how many you're talking about.

 

Can't imagine an author would accepet anything less.
Good luck on your book JJ.

 

Thanks, Boom.

 

The ones he pointed out were in the section dealing with Thomson's time at St. John's University in Minnesota, where we both graduated from. Thomson was there during his military service. For instance, it has him staying at St. John's Benet Hall in St. Cloud. St. John's is located in Collegeville, St. Cloud is the town that's 10 miles away. He has Franciscan nuns making yummy bread. The college is run by Benedictines, not Franciscans. He has Thomson and the rest marching on the St. John's campus and a girl overhearing them who's in Shoemaker Hall. Shoemaker Hall is on the campus of St. Cloud State, nowhere near the St. John's campus, so I'm not sure where the hell they were marching, as St. John's also doesn't have female students (the College of St. Benedict is the sister school, located several miles from Collegeville).