This was too precious not to share...it's from RJ's newest blog..a response from a reader. My biggest complaint is his "next-day" inconsistency..and this is Exhibit "A"...well maybe "B", after the "Jeff Kent should be on the bench so Chris Burke can play/Do whatever it takes to re-sign Jeff Kent" floppage of 04: http://blogs.chron.com/sportsjustice/archives/2008/12/salary_cap_tell.html I agree, Dick. A couple of question, though. Why aren't these types of articles/blogs posted when Drayton signs Fatboy Carlos Lee to his $100 million dollar contract? Why aren't they written every time Carlos Lee fails to run out a ground ball? Why aren't they written every time Carlos Lee fails to hustle in the outfield and misplays a pop fly, line drive, or ground ball? Regardless of the number of home runs that fat POS hits, he ain't worth 100 million and he's not what this team needs. I went back to some of your blogs around the time of the Lee signing and found that a few days before the signing you said the following: "It's believed the Orioles have offered as much as a six-year contract worth about $80 million to $90 million...If those numbers are even close to accurate, the Astros ought to take a pass and find another way to improve the club." "Carlos Lee is a very nice player if the price is right, say, $48 million over four years. If things get crazy, you maybe could justify spending $75 million over five years. The Astros shouldn't go beyond that number. He's simply not worth it." "Even if he signs Carlos Lee, the Astros have work to do with the pitching staff. They can't pay Lee so much that they're limited in what they can do with the pitching staff." And right after the signing you said this: "Memo to Uncle Drayton: you did a terrific job in signing Carlos Lee and Woody Williams." Pick a side, Dick, and run with it. It's easy to pat yourself on the back for great analysis when you argue both sides of the issue.
he does this all the time. See calling out the Rockets as a crap win at all costs team after the Artest signing then saying the are the class of the NBA a few months later.
Color me unsurprised. *yawn* Let me know when the "Chronicle" hires a journalist for their sports section.
In fairness to tricky dicky... most sports writers flipflop.. he just does it a little more often than normal. If they didn't flipflop they'd run out of things to write, quickly.
I agree...but I've never seen someone do it so quickly and so often. This Carlos Lee example is just amazing. Literally goes from setting a price and saying, "getting him at this price is ok...but above X he's just not worth it!!" The Astros blow past $X....and Richard champions the move THE NEXT DAY! That...and the interjecting of himself into his editorials...send it over the top.
I thought it was cute this morning how Dick took it upon himself to resurrect Clemen's image and let all of us who have come down on Roger what unfair folks we are. Without even looking, I am quite sure Dick has a column out there somewhere dropping the hammer on Roger over the whole fiasco.
When I saw this thread had been bumped this morning, I assumed it was about this Clemens article. I feel like he wrote that directly to Roger to appeal to him to try to pitch for the 'stros again.
He's not a reporter, he's a professional troll. His job is to stir the pot and get blog hits. Once I realized that, I stopped reading him, because it's obvious that given the choice between writing something insightful or controversial that he'll choose the controversial every single time. I seriously doubt that he believes half of what he writes.
I stopped reading him 2-3 years ago. Writers like Justice are why newspapers (particularly sports sections) are virtually irrelevant now. Raven, you said it. Justice writes for the moment and doesn't realize some people actually have memories.
Who cares? If you know you don't like what he has to say most of the time, why do you read it? I personally can't stand Jerome Solomon, so I just don't read his articles, blog or anything with his name attached. I only read Justice if the title intrigues me because he does have a lot of contacts and can occassionally give some good informative info, but that is rare.
Because we have exactly one paper in this town...with exactly 3 major sports columnists who ever write about the Texans...or Astros...or Rockets. And on any given day, usually only one is writing about a particular subject. If there were lots of other papers with columnists covering the Texans WITH MEDIA CREDENTIALS, I'd read those...but there's not. This is our choice. Suck, suck or nothing.
i think we're too married to the idea of sports pages. i get more insight into the texans, astros and rockets from this and other message boards than i will ever get from anyone working at the chronicle or any other newspaper. they are good for quotes from players and maybe some of their inside knowledge, but for analysis of moves or how the teams are playing or how management is doing, actual fans of the teams give me more than those with an agenda or who have to report to someone else.
I hear ya...but there are a few topics where your opinion might carry more weight or be different if you had media credentials and access to the team all the time. The best poster here can't match the best columnist for putting all that together. There are good columnists out there...
Bingo, especially for the Rockets. Compared to some other newspapers, the Chronicle's coverage of the Rockets is awful. Other than Feigen, I don't feel like the columnists know any more than I do. A couple of them (like Solomon) clearly know less. And Feigen's problem is he's usually too peaches and creamy for my taste. He comes across as a Rockets employee. MadMax, for an example of good coverage of an NBA team, try the Oregonian for the Blazers for about a month. It's night and day. How many newspapers have a beatwriter that will specifically say to the face of one of it's key players (paraphrasing), "You've been a disappointment". Of course beatwriters are more plugged in, but they are only as good as what they have the guts to write.
I hope you mean that he just has more inside information about the team and not that he knows more about basketball, in general. Feigen strikes me as an optimistic idiot. I sense very little basketball knowledge in any of his work and I subscribe to the theory that he is just a "mouthpiece for the organization." I also imagine his positive outlook on everything is based on a strategic decision by management to counter Blinebury's persistent cynicism.
