*Now* Plaschke finally gets it

[poindexter]

The idiocy of our country's most highly decorated columnists never fails to amaze me.

Plaschke railed against Paul Depodesta from day one as the Dodger's GM, because, god forbid, he used a computer. Or talked about on-base percentage instead of batting average.

*NOW*, after the shipped set sail years, ago, he finally figures things out.

He clearly wasn't ready for the job, which lasted only two years before he was fired for essentially tearing the place apart. But I clearly wasn't ready for him, and never really gave him time to implement the baseball sabermetrics that I have since come to accept and understand.

There are a lot of things that have helped kill newspapers. Up there with any of them, in my opinion, is having the face of your sports page be an absolute blithering idiot, like Plashke. Like Mariotti waffling back and forth 17 times the year of the White Sox won the world series.

These emperors have no clothes.

And amazingly enough, ESPN gives all the worst of them jobs on their Sports Shouting shows.


http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-plaschke-20110921,0,6539557.column

 

[Dick Whitman]

I never, ever thought I'd see Plaschke write that line. Wow. Just wow. He embarrassed himself for a decade on this issue. Absolutely humiliated himself. I'd love to pull up some of his old columns about DePodesta and sabermetrics in general. Not to embarrass him. Just to get an idea of how far he had to travel to write that sentence.

 

[Boom_70]

Plaschke missed steroids in baseball and also wrote come to Jesus column on his lack nativity.

Something you would never see Lupica do. I would rather have a columnist admit his mistakes than try to finesse his way out of them.

It shows intellectual honesty.

 

[poindexter]

The Dodgers didn't get swept in that 2004 playoff series, as Plascke writes today.

He is an absolute piss-poor columnist.

 

[poindexter]

Plaschke missed steroids in baseball and also wrote come to Jesus column on his lack nativity.

Something you would never see Lupica do. I would rather have a columnist admit his mistakes than try to finesse his way out of them.

It shows intellectual honesty.

Being better than Lupica doesn't necessarily make one good.

 

[dooley_womack1]

Because of course acceptance of baseball wonkism is the litmus test for a columnist. Maybe now poin has shaken enough stuffing out of the toy dog to be satisfied.

 

[poindexter]

lol - 'baseball sabermetrics'

 

[poindexter]

Because of course acceptance of baseball wonkism is the litmus test for a columnist.

We've discussed tons of other examples over the years at what a horrible columnist he is.

 

[Dick Whitman]

Because of course acceptance of baseball wonkism is the litmus test for a columnist.

When he's writing about baseball, and being super-opinionated about it, it is a litmus test that he at least understand what he's talking about. Or back up his arguments.

Plashcke did not.

 

[LongTimeListener]

I thought that was a pretty good column. First off, I was surprised DePodesta called him, which I think says a lot about DePodesta's character after Plaschke had spent years lodging those immature little digs. Also interesting that he believes he has found his place in the baseball world and it is more as an evaluator than as the primary decision-maker.

So, yes, Plaschke didn't get it seven or eight years ago. A lot of people didn't, and judging by the results of that Dodger team there was reason to wonder what the hell DePodesta was doing. I suppose you can take the angle that nobody can ever own up to any misinterpretations and should remain forever stuck in the first belief they ever espouse on a topic, but that's what a lot of columnists do and it doesn't reflect well on them either.

 

[dooley_womack1]

I wish Bill wouldn't have done this, actually. He has every right to think an experienced scout can judge a player better than a wonk can. And Dick, has he perhaps backed up his argument, but since you strongly disagree with his worldview on this, you have not seen him as defending his position?

And why, precisely, is DePodesta worth the defenses?

 

[Dick Whitman]

I thought that was a pretty good column. First off, I was surprised DePodesta called him, which I think says a lot about DePodesta's character after Plaschke had spent years lodging those immature little digs. Also interesting that he believes he has found his place in the baseball world and it is more as an evaluator than as the primary decision-maker.

So, yes, Plaschke didn't get it seven or eight years ago. A lot of people didn't, and judging by the results of that Dodger team there was reason to wonder what the hell DePodesta was doing. I suppose you can take the angle that nobody can ever own up to any misinterpretations and should remain forever stuck in the first belief they ever espouse on a topic, but that's what a lot of columnists do and it doesn't reflect well on them either.

For what it's worth, to reiterate: Good for Plaschke for coming around and admitting his prior mistakes. I respect that immensely.