Fire Jim Tracy

Monday, April 11, 2005

Off Day Contest!

Last time we heard from Bill Plaschke, it was five days ago, the Dodgers were 0-1, and he was belaboring his point yet again. Since then, the Dodgers have gone 4-1, Jeff Kent has hit .600, Jose Valentin has won us two games, balancing his equities, and this team has shown just as much "chemistry" as last year -- certainly that 12-10 game was worth a story a two. So where did Bill Plaschke go? What's he been doing the last five days? Do you need that much time to string together thirty one-sentence paragraphs and call it a column? Ideas, anyone?

UPDATE: A thrilling story about President Bush's I-Pod. Really, the Free World quakes. What would be on Bill Plaschke's I-Pod? "Loser" is too easy, so I'll just make that Track #1 and we'll go from there.

UPDATE 2: No doubt this will spark any number of e-mails from Jerry wanting me to change the name again. What's in a name anyway? Either you like or you don't.

UPDATE 3: By the way, I've kept meaning to return to our bankshot cameo in Tim Brown's absurd "analysis" (or was that the Foreword to their media guide? I was confused.) of the merits of the Anaheim Angels. In that article, he stated:

"If there is a, no one goes there."

Well, first, if there wasn't a firemikescioscia, and I cared at all about the Angels, one way or the other, and from what I know about Mike Scioscia's technique, I would probably start one. Jarrod Washburn in the playoffs. Scot Shields the other night. Ludicrous.

The other, more important, point is that this web-site, small and insignificant as it is anyway, is a very strange place to look for discontent with the Dodger organization as a whole. Sure, we're not big fans of Jose Flores bunts or Scott Stewart in close games, but we have nothing against having Scott Stewart on the roster to pitch in 10-2 games, or Jose Flores on the 40-man to pinch run in September. Most of all, any reader of this blog knows that as far as the organization goes, Jerry and I (I think) basically agree on the following three propositions:

1) The Times's coverage of Frank McCourt has been embarrassingly bad -- it took a business writer to finally give us any actual information about his financial situation. In any event, everybody has jumped the gun.
2) We don't care whether anyone with the Dodgers returns T.J. Simers's phone calls, though we are concerned with fan communication, and as future Dodger season-ticket holders (Thank you, law school!) hope that such communication improves.
3) This site is basically a Paul DePodesta apologia from top to bottom, starting from defending if not the failure to resign Beltre, at least the method by which the negotiation took place, noting in the middle that despite everyone's hand-wringing, there was no guarantee that we would end up with Ross behind the plate (and we didn't) and ending with having to spend three months battling Bill Plaschke on The Meaning of Alex Cora in three verses of Latin.
3b) And as a result of 3, I've already discussed my own personal dilemma several times between providing my usual criticism of Tracy with my desire to defend what I think is largely, an organization on the right track.

So, in conclusion, let me just put on the record that Tim Brown, who is fast becoming a writer I look forward to even less than Plaschke, is either lazy or lying. If he had actually read a few posts on this site, he might have caught the tenor of what we are trying to do and not used us as fodder for his biased agenda. If he did, and didn't care, then he misrepresented us. Either way, I am not of the opinion that all advertising is good advertising, and let me state here and now to readers reading this blog that they will read criticism of the Dodgers and Jim Tracy, but only targeted to improvement, and certainly not of the type that Brown (mis)represented in his column.

As for you, Timmy, I get a small taste of why Jeff Kent doesn't like to talk to you guys. I haven't said two words to you, never will, and you still got around to misrepresenting me. Thank you.

UPDATE 4: By the way, I would post this above and prominently, but I don't want Jerry's point about Lowe to be missed. I'm not sure if I even agree with him myself , but that sort of discussion is the type that certainly is missing from the Times, and should be encouraged. My self-indulgent wars with the "reporters" at the Times take second billing.


Post a Comment

<< Home