Little exchange between Staples, Litke

Nothing earth-shaking, this came across my Twitter feed this evening. Apparently, Andy Staples of SI and Jim Litke of AP had a little disagreement about story selection and quality of stories from the NCAA final.


http://twitter.com/#!/Andy_Staples

http://twitter.com/#!/JimLitke

It caught my attention mostly because of this little shot:

Jim Litke ‏ @JimLitke Close
@Andy_Staples Let's talk lazy. A sycophantic profile of Davis based on stat sheet? Really? Why? Didn't want to get too far from the buffet?

Anyway, not a major deal, but caught my attention.

 

Do you have link to the profile Staples is referring to?

 

Pretty sure Litke is referring to Staples' profile:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/andy_staples/04/03/anthony.davis.kentucky/index.html

 

Wonder what would set Litke off like that. He's tweeted twice during the past year.

 

Is that really Litke? Three tweets since last April and the two most recent are shots at other writers.

Very odd.

 

I could be wrong, but I'd guess it was Staples' tweet regarding a Jason Lisk article that ripped Litke:

<i>The people who lazily embraced the anti one-and-done narrative I warned about Sunday? @JasonLisk crushed one here.</i>

The article: http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2012/04/03/jim-litke-lives-in-a-college-basketball-fairy-tale-that-was-ruined-when-kentuckys-future-pros-won-the-title/

A quote from the article: <i>"Jim Litke must live in a world where, until the clock struck almost midnight last night and Calipari turned the orange basketball into his own morally decayed carriage, college athletic championships at the highest level were not about money, or rosters full of NBA players, or mercenary coaches moving on for the quickest buck."</i>

 

FWIW, I wasn't real enamored with the hand-wringing being done over Kentucky and Cal. I'm inclined not to agree with Litke's article. But I wouldn't call his column lazy. It's a point of view. I don't know that a point of view can be defined as lazy.

 

Sure it can, if there's no explanation or defense of said point of view.

Whitlock proves it all the time.

 

There's obvious defense. The fact that Cal got two schools vacated is a pretty good argument to suggest he's corrupt.

 

I just don't get all the fuss over ... Jim Litke? Yes, he's a columnist with one of the world's dominant wire services, but I've always found his columns so vanilla to blah.

 

and she hits a home run. quality point.

 

Jim Litke calling Andy Staples lazy is like Gary Sheffield calling Arthur Fonzarelli tense. (Just for you, MisterCreosote.)