Olney vs. Verducci

[rockcrit88]

Who is the better baseball feature writer -- Buster Olney at ESPN or SI's Tom Verducci?

 

[SheaSeals]

Both great, but Verducci might be the best ever at the full-form baseball feature.

 

[Boom_70]

Olney - because he did not sell his soul to Roger Clemens.

 

[Shaggy]

Verducci is a better writer, Olney is better nuts-and-bolts and information gatherer.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Verducci is a better writer, Olney is better nuts-and-bolts and information gatherer.

100 percent right. Both are great, but I'd rather read a feature by Verducci, but if I want breaking news, I'd go to Olney.

 

[DanOregon]

I got smacked in one of my first posts about sometimes getting lost in one of Verducci's signature number-filled paragraphs, but the guy knows his stuff.

 

[Boom_70]

I got smacked in one of my first posts about sometimes getting lost in one of Verducci's signature number-filled paragraphs, but the guy knows his stuff.

I got completely lost in his book "The Yankee Years" It jumped all over the place. At one point he would be writing about 1996 and with no warning jump to A Rod story.

 

[cranberry]

Verducci is a better writer, Olney is better nuts-and-bolts and information gatherer.

100 percent right. Both are great, but I'd rather read a feature by Verducci, but if I want breaking news, I'd go to Olney.

Not a fan of either of them as a feature writer. Not a fan of Verducci at all, in fact. Buster's game stories were among of the best of his generation, though, and his analysis is extremely good. His opinion stuff is sometimes off the wall.

 

[leo1]

i was hoping this thread was about a throwdown between the two. oh well.

 

[Boom_70]

Verducci is a better writer, Olney is better nuts-and-bolts and information gatherer.

100 percent right. Both are great, but I'd rather read a feature by Verducci, but if I want breaking news, I'd go to Olney.

Not a fan of either of them as a feature writer. Not a fan of Verducci at all, in fact. Buster's game stories were among of the best of his generation, though, and his analysis is extremely good. His opinion stuff is sometimes off the wall.

Agree, Olney's gamers when he covered The Yankees for the Times were second to none.

 

[Den1983]

I got smacked in one of my first posts about sometimes getting lost in one of Verducci's signature number-filled paragraphs, but the guy knows his stuff.

I got completely lost in his book "The Yankee Years" It jumped all over the place. At one point he would be writing about 1996 and with no warning jump to A Rod story.

Agreed, though I did like the book. It was, indeed, difficult to follow.

 

[Den1983]

Verducci is a better writer, Olney is better nuts-and-bolts and information gatherer.

/thread

 

[Shaggy]

I got smacked in one of my first posts about sometimes getting lost in one of Verducci's signature number-filled paragraphs, but the guy knows his stuff.

I got completely lost in his book "The Yankee Years" It jumped all over the place. At one point he would be writing about 1996 and with no warning jump to A Rod story.

In the same breath, "The Last Night of the Yankee Dynasty" was a fantastic book. One of the best baseball books I've read.

 

[podunk press]

Definitely Buster Olney.

 

[Drip]

Verducci is a better writer, Olney is better nuts-and-bolts and information gatherer.

100 percent right. Both are great, but I'd rather read a feature by Verducci, but if I want breaking news, I'd go to Olney.

It's all in the eye of the beholder. Neither knows more about baseball than Bill Conlin.

 

[FootballScribe]

Big fan of both. They're very different in a lot of ways but both excellent at what they do.

 

[cranberry]

Verducci is a better writer, Olney is better nuts-and-bolts and information gatherer.

100 percent right. Both are great, but I'd rather read a feature by Verducci, but if I want breaking news, I'd go to Olney.

It's all in the eye of the beholder. Neither knows more about baseball than Bill Conlin.

Please. That's just ridiculous. Both know far more about current baseball than Conlin and both know the game better.

Conlin might know some old stories about Pete Rose better because he's old but that's the extent of it. Bet you think Hal Bodley is well-informed, too.

 

[Drip]

Verducci is a better writer, Olney is better nuts-and-bolts and information gatherer.

100 percent right. Both are great, but I'd rather read a feature by Verducci, but if I want breaking news, I'd go to Olney.

It's all in the eye of the beholder. Neither knows more about baseball than Bill Conlin.

Please. That's just ridiculous. Both know far more about current baseball than Conlin and both know the game better.

Conlin might know some old stories about Pete Rose better because he's old but that's the extent of it. Bet you think Hal Bodley is well-informed, too.

Having worked with and been around all four, I'll stand by my original statement. I think the world of all four but for my taste, I prefer Conlin and Bodley.

 

[JakeandElwood]

Of course you have ::).

 

[cranberry]

Verducci is a better writer, Olney is better nuts-and-bolts and information gatherer.

100 percent right. Both are great, but I'd rather read a feature by Verducci, but if I want breaking news, I'd go to Olney.

It's all in the eye of the beholder. Neither knows more about baseball than Bill Conlin.

Please. That's just ridiculous. Both know far more about current baseball than Conlin and both know the game better.

Conlin might know some old stories about Pete Rose better because he's old but that's the extent of it. Bet you think Hal Bodley is well-informed, too.

Having worked with and been around all four, I'll stand by my original statement. I think the world of all four but for my taste, I prefer Conlin and Bodley.

Are you senile, too? Those guys might have been "cutting edge" back in '63 but neither of them is relevant in baseball these days.