Is this beat writer trying too hard?

Shi Davidi covers the Toronto Blue Jays for Rogers Sportsnet. Rogers owns the TV network and the team, which you probably knew already.

One thing that Davidi always does these days is use "inside" terms in his stories, trying to sound like a player. In this one, he talks about Josh Donaldson's two home runs coming off "middle-middle" pitches, and how in one at bat he laid off a "biscuit change." In pressers, he asks questions that contain similar terms.

I am almost positive he has no playing experience to speak of, so it's not like this is how he naturally speaks.

I don't read a lot of baseball coverage outside of Toronto's. Is this kind of language common throughout the league? I find it obnoxious and it just seems like he's trying too hard.

Thoughts?

 

I dont think its uncommon.

Ive been annoyed by it in other spots, such as a guy who insists on calling all hockey assists "apples." Other times I hardly notice the insider terms. All in the delivery I suppose.

 

I've been following baseball all my life and have never heard of those terms. If he's trying to impress someone, he should stop, bc I feel confident in saying 99 percent of viewers have no clue what he means by these terms.

 

Looks like he's fallen into the old trap of writing for his sources instead of the readers.

 

Jargon is the final refuge of a journalist insecure in his/her knowledge of the subject. Trying to show they know more than they do.

 

That's an unfair shot at Whitman. Take it back.

 

Middle-middle would be a location reference that is pretty obvious.

But biscuit change? That's pretty stupid to talk like that.

 

Never heard of these terms. Would throw down my newspaper cursing and take out my 9mm Luger and go postal on my unsuspecting co-workers if they wrote shit like this.

 

Another gripe about baseball writing in general these days is that so many stories are far too geared toward seamheads. Sometimes it's using "insider" terms like this guy -- one of the worst ones out there is a when a story states a pitcher who is recovering from an injury will "throw a bullpen," which sounds as if it requires superhuman strength. What's wrong with "throw a bullpen session," which the average reader can understand? Or the stories get far too caught up in the alphabet soup of metrics and analytics.

And partly because of ESPN and other broadcast outlets, too many stories have picked up baseball cliches. A particular example is home runs -- can't just write that a guy "hit a home run" or "homered." Instead, it's a "big fly," or he "went deep." Or he hit a "bomb," which is the absolute worst.

 

Apples? WTF?

 

Who gives a shit if he talks like that. If he writes like that, then he's shitty.