Great writing, great reporting

Just another reason why I think this guy is one of the best columnists in the country.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-foytack042307&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

 

Pretty impressive to have Foytack's number in hand so quickly. His phone's not exactly ringing off the hook these days.

EDIT: Never mind; it's listed. But give Passan credit for taking 10 seconds to find it.

 

So I assume that was off different pitchers? Because not explaining that, but leaving it in the middle of a story about two people giving up four consecutive home runs made it confusing.

Maybe just to me, but still. You can't assume everyone knows everything.

 

Glad to see that even when the Yankees do something historically bad, we still have to start a thread about it.

Seriously, this was my favorite line: "He had turned his television to the game momentarily, watching Ramirez hit his home run and wondering why his pants were so baggy." Classic.

 

Damn - and that was a night game, too, right? When did the column pop up? Last night? This morning?

Either way, that's some strong, strong writing and reporting by Passan in a short amount of time. Jeff is doing a heckuva job for yahoo. Quality writer. Quality guy.

 

If journalists really are becoming obsolete, we can reverse that if we do work like this.

 

That sounded confusing to me also. The part about the four pitchers made me wonder if they were four consecutive pitches? I think some readers would wonder the same thing. Besides that, very good.

 

For the record: Foytack was the only pitcher, until Wright last night, to give up four straight homers all-by-his-own-self. I thought that part was clear in the column, seeing as how that was the point of the column. Guess it wasn't clear to everybody.

I think it's the 5th time in ML history -- first since the Dodgers last year, and first in the AL since the Twins in 1964 -- that a team hit four straight homers. None of them were off four straight pitches, which wasn't mentioned.

Probably both were details that could have been mentioned/clarified, but the homers came late last night and this was written on deadline. Pretty impressive, in light of that.

 

There were 13 pitches. HRs came on 2-1, 1-2, 1-1, and 0-1 counts.

 

If you read what I wrote, I got that that was the point. My point was, why leave in a confusing segment when a.) it wasn't necessary to the piece and b.) it wouldn't have taken more than four words to clarify it?

 

Don't most guys get yanked after HR No. 3?

Reminds me of the old line. Pitcher is getting shelled. Manager calls time and goes to the mound. Turns to the catcher and asks: "How is his stuff?"

Catcher replies: "I don't know ... I haven't caught one yet."

 

You're right, very impressive on deadline.