Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Simers: Marcus Thames can’t field, can’t hit righties, won’t talk about it . . are you excited yet?

Consider d-bag button fully engaged.

Maybe it’s because he’s averaged only 44 games a season on defense, prompting an obvious question.

“Are you that horrible on defense that teams don’t think it’s worth playing such a home run threat?’’ I asked by way of introduction.

Maybe somebody else wastes time schmoozing with Tims/Tems, but he’s a one-year rental who has some explaining to do. How bad are you on defense that teams don’t dare risk playing you?

Tims/Tems just smiled.

...When I came back on Tims/Tems, he sat silent. I can see one problem he might have on defense if everyone is relying on him to yell “I got it.”

He said he wasn’t going to talk to me because I hadn’t introduced myself. That would have allowed him to pull out the little card the Dodgers’ PR department provides players advising them how to get a running start on Page 2.

I can’t imagine this is the first time in 10 years that Tims/Tems has been asked why he stinks on defense, thereby limiting his time as a regular player.

Unable to answer, he just stood and walked away.

Repoz Posted: March 22, 2011 at 04:42 PM | 227 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: dodgers, media

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3 > 
   101. Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt! Posted: March 23, 2011 at 07:10 PM (#3776644)
Seriously: What the #### are you talking about?

Now you've gone and made Dayn crazy and he's used to the commenters at Fox Sports! Dayn, take a deep breath and a couple of Edible Apple-A-Day strips from Health Essist. You will feel slightly better for it.
   102. Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms Posted: March 23, 2011 at 07:36 PM (#3776670)
As for TJ's treatment of Thames, I guess it starts with the sell from the team: "look we got this guy who's 27th best ever in hitting HRs", and they don't even know how to pronounce his name. So he asks Thames why he's a nobody and probably goads him with the name thing. Now, Thames can react in what Simers would consider an adult way by defending himself, pointing out the shortcomings of baseball management or making a joke back at him. (He gives examples in the article.) But no, he goes the typical sportsperson way and appears surly and doesn't say anything.


This is why I have the problem with Simers' piece here. He has a legitimate issue with the Dodgers but then goes and treats Thames in an unprofessional manner. Thames has done nothing wrong at this point other than not being an in his prime Reggie Smith and he has to deal with a ridiculous question like "have you always sucked?"

I'm an accountant. If upon meeting me for the first time someone initiated the conversation by saying "You don't have your CPA, have you always been completely ignorant in how to do accounting?" I probably would stop being civil pretty damned quick. At best I would give brief answers and end the conversation as quickly as possible.
   103. Kurt Posted: March 23, 2011 at 07:40 PM (#3776677)
Simers is probably a jerk. This was a pointless column (if anything, it only made Simers look like a jerk). But I don't see how his digs are much different from long-range potshots by other paid writers, who are applauded for their insults if they're clever and correct enough. At least Simers expresses them within punching range.

Then again, like I hinted before, I'm a Mariotti survivor. I'm used to seeing these bombs thrown from the comfort of a couch, so the fact that Simers actually gets in front of athletes makes him tolerable, even if he's not likable.



I'd be a lot more impressed with his courage if he treated judgment-proof construction workers and truck drivers like this, rather than trying to provoke millionaire employees of billionaires.
   104. phredbird Posted: March 23, 2011 at 07:46 PM (#3776682)
He has a legitimate issue with the Dodgers but then goes and treats Thames in an unprofessional manner.


this is a legitimate criticism, i'll cop to that. it is a problem that every time a simers piece is posted that the conversation becomes about simers and not the substance of the column.
   105. Howie Menckel Posted: March 23, 2011 at 07:47 PM (#3776684)
Ex-MLBer Morgan Ensberg tweets:

I'm not ok w a story I read in LA Times about Marcus Thames. The line of questioning was cruel
   106. cardsfanboy Posted: March 23, 2011 at 07:52 PM (#3776691)
Seems appropriate for someone called "fanboy" to make inaccurate generalizations, I suppose. Sorry your resume got tossed in the trash, pal.

I know more than 100 sportswriters pretty well and another 100+ less well. They are a very intelligent bunch overall. Many of them have flaws - some serious - but lack of intelligence is not generally one of them. Lack of math skills - absolutely.

Oh, and next time, consider buying a comma when you type a sentence about intelligence. The typo of "sporstwriter" didn't aid your cause, either.

Carry on.


not a professional writer, don't need to buy no damn comma.

there are hundreds of professional sports writers out there, a great many of them are actually good, then you have Mariotti and the ilk, who completely undermine their profession by claiming they don't need to learn anything new about the game they cover because they already know it all. Imagine if a computer programmer or an enginer or doctor lived by those professional standards? It's the only profession I've ever seen prominent members go out of their way to declare their insistence on remaining ignorant.

Yes you have guys like Posnanski, Neyer or Goold who seem to understand that remaining ignorant is no way to get through life, but for every one of those you get two Chass or Mariotti who refuse to learn, and you get one Simers who entire schtick is to generate page hits by being classless shock jocks.
   107. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 23, 2011 at 07:57 PM (#3776697)
I think it's great that there is a writer who for whatever reason does not worry about what the teams that he covers think of him. Normally, you can't be too critical of a team or an owner because you know that you have to go back the following week to get another story.

Does not apply here. Simers' shtick is set in stone. A playful reaction, or an irritated reaction, or no reaction at all, are all played off as evidence of Simers' epic win. Whether you buy him a drink or bar him from the premises, he cranks out the same column, as his list of former Dodger "head cases" and leftover Lofton and Manny insults demonstrates. The same goes for the reader response, where "your style is not good" counts as a +1. "Heads I win, tails I win."

That dynamic is boring. If the jokes along the way were funny enough to make up for it, it'd be easier to overlook the gimmick, but they're not. Or maybe the Dodgers' 2011 press guide-- Positive statistic dug up for unexceptional player! Typo or mistake!-- really was the perfect, overdue target for a witty takedown.
   108. Rants Mulliniks Posted: March 23, 2011 at 07:58 PM (#3776698)
I think it's great that there is a writer who for whatever reason does not worry about what the teams that he covers think of him.


Yes, because that's an excellent way to build respect and trust in order to get a lead on any future team incident worth writing about. Believe me, I'm not a starchy devotee of hierarchical order, so I don't think proper manners are always due, but to go up to someone you've never met in your life, who has no history to suggest they deserve anything less than common courtesy, and say the things that Simers said is uncalled for. Simers is a jackass, plain and simple.
   109. Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms Posted: March 23, 2011 at 07:59 PM (#3776700)
this is a legitimate criticism, i'll cop to that. it is a problem that every time a simers piece is posted that the conversation becomes about simers and not the substance of the column.


By writing the piece the way he did, including the ###### little "Tims/Thames" thing and the inappropriate way he approached Thames the substance gets lost. If his point was "the Dodgers are incompetent in every way" then fair enough but he has been around long enough to know he can write a substantive article or a snarky article and the responses to that article will be substantive or snarky.
   110. phredbird Posted: March 23, 2011 at 08:04 PM (#3776705)
from today's simers column (the lede was about kershaw, and it was quite mellow, btw):

MARCUS THAMES, pronounced "Tims/Tems," ran past me carrying a first baseman's glove. I guess the Dodgers don't want him to hurt himself, so they took away his outfield glove.

"Come on and help me out," he says with a laugh.

He caught the first eight out of 10 ground balls at first, the next 11 straight and I guess the Dodgers will be moving James Loney to left field.

"So go ahead and ask me the question you wanted to ask," says Thames, as friendly as his teammates had described him before walking off in a snit a day earlier.

"Are you that horrible on defense that teams don't think it's worth playing such a home run threat?"

"No, I'm not that bad of a defensive player," he says, and that wasn't so tough, now was it?

"When I first got to the big leagues I was labeled a DH," he says, so why would the Dodgers hire a DH?

"They're not getting a DH," he says. "If I can get out there on a more consistent basis, I can prove myself."

The Dodgers are going to platoon Thames in left field with a cast of rejects because he also has the reputation for not being able to hit right-handed pitchers.

"Certain righties," he says. "I'm a better hitter against right-handers than people think."

Now as for running away from the obvious question a day earlier, Thames says, "I didn't handle it well because I've never been approached the way I was approached. It shocked the hell out of me."

I found it odd that over the last nine years that no one had asked him about his poor defense keeping him from becoming an everyday player.

"I heard talk, but no one had ever said it directly to me," he says, understandably thrilled now to have it said to his face rather than behind his back.

Just took him 24 hours to be thrilled. That's all.


i'm sure everybody will have their own thoughts about this ... :)
   111. Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms Posted: March 23, 2011 at 08:51 PM (#3776749)
Good for Thames taking the high road. Doesn't change the fact that Simers was unprofessional in his approach on Tuesday. Frankly I don't think Thames had any call to apologize, I don't think he handled that situation poorly at all.
   112. JL Posted: March 23, 2011 at 09:07 PM (#3776764)
But no, he goes the typical sportsperson way and appears surly and doesn't say anything.

Let me get this straight - Simmers insults him and very likely intentially gets his name wrong, and Thames is the surly one because he decides Simmers in not worth the time?

Unbelievable.
   113. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 23, 2011 at 09:10 PM (#3776768)
Satire!
   114. JL Posted: March 23, 2011 at 09:14 PM (#3776770)
Good for Thames taking the high road.

Very impressive. Simmers would not get the time of day from me.
   115. Steve Treder Posted: March 23, 2011 at 09:17 PM (#3776778)
Let me get this straight - Simmers insults him and very likely intentially gets his name wrong, and Thames is the surly one because he decides Simmers in not worth the time?

Unbelievable.


Entirely.

There's nothing complicated about this at all: Simers is an unredeemable a$$hole.
   116. nick swisher hygiene Posted: March 23, 2011 at 09:32 PM (#3776790)
it is a problem that every time a simers piece is posted that the conversation becomes about simers and not the substance of the column.

and it is a hypothesis--mine!--that this is because Simers is a dick.

notice that in the, uh, follow-up piece, Simers' innovative reportorial style does not lead to any new insights about the game or the player, but instead generates a little narrative about player and reporter and their history together....

....a narrative about which I reserve the right not to give a flying ####.
   117. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: March 23, 2011 at 09:43 PM (#3776797)
My god. Sometimes a cigar really is just a cigar, and sometimes a guy who appears to be a complete a**hole really is just a complete a**hole. There's no need to reach for other explanations.
   118. Alex_Lewis Posted: March 23, 2011 at 09:46 PM (#3776801)
I found it odd that over the last nine years that no one had asked him about his poor defense keeping him from becoming an everyday player.

"I heard talk, but no one had ever said it directly to me," he says, understandably thrilled now to have it said to his face rather than behind his back.

Just took him 24 hours to be thrilled. That's all.


Simers is a true American hero.
   119. Kurt Posted: March 23, 2011 at 10:04 PM (#3776808)
it is a problem that every time a simers piece is posted that the conversation becomes about simers and not the substance of the column.

My understanding of the problem is that Simers himself is the subject of all of his columns.
   120. Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn) Posted: March 23, 2011 at 11:04 PM (#3776835)
Now you've gone and made Dayn crazy and he's used to the commenters at Fox Sports! Dayn, take a deep breath and a couple of Edible Apple-A-Day strips from Health Essist. You will feel slightly better for it.

Thanks, Shooty! I took your advice and visited one of the partner sites, and, I must say, the edible strips from Health Essist are just what a busy guy like me needs! I wish I had time to give myself the proper nutrition, but sometimes I just don't. But thanks to Health Essist and the proper ecommerce infrastructure, I can get the nutrition my body needs and still make that deadline!
   121. Srul Itza Posted: March 23, 2011 at 11:05 PM (#3776837)
A Modest Proposal: Since Simers is not worth reading, don't read him. When he is posted here, don't click through. Don't even read TFE.

Ignore him and ignore Repoz's efforts to troll us with him.
   122. Guapo Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:44 AM (#3776943)
Apologies if this has already been posted upthread. A NY Times article about Thames from 2006 that is uplifting and actually worth reading.

Link
   123. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 10:39 AM (#3777036)
Let me get this straight - Simmers insults him and very likely intentially gets his name wrong, and Thames is the surly one because he decides Simmers in not worth the time?

Unbelievable.


No, Simers doesn't get his name wrong. Simers finds out how to pronounce it. The Dodgers get his name wrong. Simers presents it to Thames that his employers don't know how to pronounce his name. You get Simmers name wrong because you are either careless or want to make a childish point about it. Simers' point, and the butt of that joke, is that the Dodgers are pointing out this guy is a special HR hitter, but they don't even know his name. Sheesh. How many tems?

Thanks Phredbird. You see, everyone? TJ has given Tems a chance to answer his critics that nobody else gave him. And the relationship between TJ and Tems may grow from here.

There's nothing complicated about this at all: Simers is an unredeemable a$$hole.

Does that mean I win - Treder's on the other side?

A Modest Proposal: Since Simers is not worth reading, don't read him. When he is posted here, don't click through. Don't even read TFE.

Ignore him and ignore Repoz's efforts to troll us with him.


Why don't you just keep away if you don't like the discussions?
   124. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 10:59 AM (#3777039)
My understanding of the problem is that Simers himself is the subject of all of his columns.

Well, yes, it's part of the problem as people expect it to be about the LA teams by a "neutral" reporter. But I'd say the main part of the problem is that the good people of Primerland react the same way as Mr Thames.

Now as for running away from the obvious question a day earlier, Thames says, "I didn't handle it well because I've never been approached the way I was approached. It shocked the hell out of me."


You all thought Thames was justified to take offense, whereas he has had time to think about it and now admits he didn't handle it well. I hope you are big enough to make the same admission.

I found it odd that over the last nine years that no one had asked him about his poor defense keeping him from becoming an everyday player.

"I heard talk, but no one had ever said it directly to me," he says, understandably thrilled now to have it said to his face rather than behind his back.


Hilarious.

Simers is a true American hero.

You think you are joking, but you are actually correct.
   125. Rants Mulliniks Posted: March 24, 2011 at 11:16 AM (#3777041)
Just thought I'd share this:

From: Simers, T.J. [mailto:TJ.Simers@latimes.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 5:01 PM
To: Dickie, James (DNR/MRN)
Subject: Re: Congratulations!

Oh you're so tough for a child

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dickie, James (DNR/MRN) <James.Dickie@___.ca>
To: Simers, T.J.
Sent: Wed Mar 23 14:47:20 2011
Subject: Congratulations!

On being an #######! You’re lucky Thames walked away, I would have punched you in the face.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-simers-20110322,0,3093888,full.column

Jim Dickie
Fredericton, NB
Canada
   126. Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms Posted: March 24, 2011 at 01:00 PM (#3777065)
You all thought Thames was justified to take offense, whereas he has had time to think about it and now admits he didn't handle it well. I hope you are big enough to make the same admission.


Or Thames knows this is someone he has to deal with and it's easier to make nice with a guy with Simers' power in town rather than starting off an adversarial relationship.

No, Simers doesn't get his name wrong. Simers finds out how to pronounce it. The Dodgers get his name wrong. Simers presents it to Thames that his employers don't know how to pronounce his name. You get Simmers name wrong because you are either careless or want to make a childish point about it. Simers' point, and the butt of that joke, is that the Dodgers are pointing out this guy is a special HR hitter, but they don't even know his name.


And once again because you haven't gotten it yet. If Simers has an issue with the Dodgers handling of this thing that is fine, he should address it with their PR staff. To blatantly insult someone who has done nothing wrong is just being an #######.

Cold Promisian's exchange with Simers is enlightening. Someone he has never met before contacts him with a fairly rude comment and Simers responds by being ######. Thames was much more courteous just by walking away.
   127. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 01:39 PM (#3777086)
And once again because you haven't gotten it yet. If Simers has an issue with the Dodgers handling of this thing that is fine, he should address it with their PR staff.

Why should he? He is a columnist. He uses the material in his columns. He considers that more effective than writing a letter to the PR staff saying Mr Thames' name is pronounced Thames not Tims.

And just how does he insult Thames? He merely presents him with the facts and puts them in front of him in a provocative way. The insult comes from the Dodgers, not Simers. In both cases. To me it is quite incredible that there are so many people here throwing personal insults at Simers because he is supposed to be insulting. He isn't insulting anyone, He asks provocative questions in an ironic, disingenuous manner. (Ironic because he pretends not to understand and pretends to adopt the Dodgers' point of view to highlight its folly). He has not insulted Thames. He has shown him the implicit insults and criticisms from the Dodgers and his other previous teams. He does it to his face which is more than the Dodgers, you guys or Simers' letter writer have done with your insulting opinions.

Cold Promisian's exchange with Simers is enlightening. Someone he has never met before contacts him with a fairly rude comment and Simers responds by being ######. Thames was much more courteous just by walking away.

Simers behaves perfectly well in this. He assumes the guy who threatens to use violence is a child because his reaction, as was Thames' and the people's on this board, was that of a child. (This is irony. He probably suspects it is not a child. But pretends to get it wrong because it is SO childish it must be from a child.)

But, really, it amazes me that anyone can accuse Simers on this one when he responds so gently to a personal insult and a threat of violence. (And it's Prosimian, not Promisian.)
   128. Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms Posted: March 24, 2011 at 01:48 PM (#3777092)
And just how does he insult Thames? He merely presents him with the facts and puts them in front of him in a provocative way.


Come on. You can't honestly be saying you don't see how this; "How bad are you on defense that teams don’t dare risk playing you?" is insulting, can you?

Going to Thames to find answers to a mistake by the PR department is like going to the PR department to ask why the shortstop made an error. I'm not saying he should write a letter to the PR department, I'm saying his column should have been ABOUT the PR department with Thames as the background. That he approached Thames tells me he wanted to provoke a response.
   129. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:01 PM (#3777106)
LA Times: Simers: I Was a Total Dick to a Professional Athlete

LOS ANGELES -- There is a man who makes his living as a professional athlete. He has a funny name. It is pronounced in a certain way. I spent most of my afternoon yesterday being a total dick to this man. His name is pronounced funny.

This athlete is, for a professional athlete, relatively less skilled than other professional athletes. I pointed this out to him in the most childish way possible. There is no response he could give that I wouldn't make a cheap and dickish joke out of. Did you hear he has a funny name?
   130. Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn) Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:03 PM (#3777107)
If you call Thames's reaction the reaction of a child, then you know nothing of children or adults.
   131. Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn) Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:05 PM (#3777109)
Apologies if this has already been posted upthread. A NY Times article about Thames from 2006 that is uplifting and actually worth reading.

Link


Thanks for this. So glad this pampered monster, who probably makes less than Simers, was taken down a peg or three.
   132. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:05 PM (#3777110)
No, you missed it too, MCoA. You're just showing your ignorance. His name isn't pronounced funny, but baseball people are so ignorant they think it's pronounced Tims. And so do you. Ha ha ha.
   133. Petunia inquires about ponies Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:11 PM (#3777116)
[65] philistine makes some good points.

This is sad for you to say since he is so clearly ####### with us on this thread.



i'd like to hear why you think that instead of just making a declaration.


He's further making the point with every post. And I justified my opinion when I expressed it originally - every time philistine mentions or defines satire or irony he is SO clearly describing his own posts that I don't see how anybody is still allowing themselves to get tweaked instead of laughing along.
   134. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:30 PM (#3777138)
Going to Thames to find answers to a mistake by the PR department

It's not the PR department, it's the managers - the ones who are saying how good he is, how good he'll be for LA. Nobody knows how to pronounce his name. Yet he's the 27th best hitter in baseball history, according to what Simers is told!

Come on. You can't honestly be saying you don't see how this; "How bad are you on defense that teams don’t dare risk playing you?" is insulting, can you?

It is certainly provocative designed to get a reaction. But not an angry one, Simers wants a playful one. We have seen from his exchanges with Manny and Kent that he wants playful banter. I really don't think it is the shock jock tactic that the insulting Cards fan kept going on about. It is mischievous not malicious. And he does it to their face not behind their back and is prepared to take (and report) the jokey comments made at his expense.

every time philistine mentions or defines satire or irony he is SO clearly describing his own posts that I don't see how anybody is still allowing themselves to get tweaked instead of laughing along

I only define the terms when I use them because people always question them in subsequent posts.
   135. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:44 PM (#3777153)
The satiric potential of the 2011 L.A. Dodgers Press Guide has only been touched upon. It presumably mentions that Blake DeWitt hit .320 in the #6 spot of the lineup last year, and that John Ely went 3-1 in May. (And what the @#%& is it, Ee-LEE, or Ee-LIE?)

And yet, many of their other playing statistics are unimpressive! There's comedy gold in them thar hills! If T.J. Simers can't get another 20 columns out of this treasure trove of classic irony, either he's applying the "mercy rule" or he's just phoning it in.
   136. flournoy Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:47 PM (#3777155)
It is certainly provocative designed to get a reaction. But not an angry one, Simers wants a playful one. We have seen from his exchanges with Manny and Kent that he wants playful banter.


Approaching someone unsolicited and asking him why he's not good at his job is a very poor way of trying to initiate a playful banter. I think you have a lot to learn about human behavior. There's really not much else to be said.
   137. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:54 PM (#3777162)
Approaching someone unsolicited and asking him why he's not good at his job is a very poor way of trying to initiate a playful banter.

Well, not exactly. He is approaching a figure in the public eye about apparent flaws in his game which stop him from being allowed to do a job at which he is the 27th best in baseball history.
   138. rr Posted: March 24, 2011 at 02:59 PM (#3777168)
Anybody with a little time for a good human-interest read, including TJ Simers, should check out Guapo's link. Here is a quick hit; it was written during the 2006 World Series:

(Veterine) Thames (Marcus' mother) nearly cried before the third syllable. Speaking softly and pausing to catch her breath, she said she believed that her paralysis had motivated Marcus to excel.

“It made him want to show that he could make something out of himself,” she said.

After his mother’s comments were relayed to Thames, he nodded.

“When you have somebody who can’t get themselves a glass of water, you look at this baseball stuff and it’s easy in comparison,” Thames said Friday before the Tigers worked out at Comerica Park.

___

Probably explains a little bit about why Thames could take the high road with Simers. I don't like the Dodgers at all, but I'll be rooting for Thames some this year now.
   139. Charles S. is pretty fast for an old guy Posted: March 24, 2011 at 03:00 PM (#3777169)
And just how does he insult Thames? He merely presents him with the facts and puts them in front of him in a provocative way.

That's kind of the definition of an insult. If you walk up to a man you've never met, and say, "Why did you marry such an ugly woman? Is it because you are blind or because you're so pathetic you couldn't get a better-looking woman?" that would be an insult. It might also be a presentation of facts in a provocative way. Then consider that any verbal response can be turned into an excuse to mock, and any physical response can be turned into an excuse to sue. Thames knows instinctively, if not implicitly that millionaires can't hit anyone, and you can never win an argument against someone who "buys ink by the barrel". No matter how you dress it up, it was a dick move by Simers.
   140. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 03:11 PM (#3777182)
Simers isn't insulting a wife, he wants to know what Thames can do for the team he writes about and the line of questioning is professional. He's good at hitting HRs but can't get on the field. I think a journalist is entitled to ask why and to wonder what he can do for a team in the NL.

Charles S, you have very narrow views. Your example betrays a terrible attitude towards women and what you think they represent for a man.
   141. Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms Posted: March 24, 2011 at 03:13 PM (#3777184)
It's not the PR department, it's the managers - the ones who are saying how good he is, how good he'll be for LA. Nobody knows how to pronounce his name. Yet he's the 27th best hitter in baseball history, according to what Simers is told!


Then his problem is with the managers, still not Thames. And your (or Simers') reading comprehension needs to be worked on. No one said Thames is the 27th best player of all time, simply that he is 27th all time in a particular stat. Every media guide in baseball has silly little stuff like that.
   142. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 03:23 PM (#3777200)
Sigh... are you being deliberately obtuse?

And your (or Simers') reading comprehension needs to be worked on.

That's funny.

And where's Nieporent anyway? Post 142 and he isn't here yet.
   143. Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt! Posted: March 24, 2011 at 03:49 PM (#3777226)
Nieporent! Nieporent! Nieporent!
   144. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 24, 2011 at 03:53 PM (#3777228)
I guess we can't rule out the possiblity that "philistine" IS Simers, rather than just some elaborate wind-up.
   145. Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt! Posted: March 24, 2011 at 03:58 PM (#3777231)
I guess we can't rule out the possiblity that "philistine" IS Simers, rather than just some elaborate wind-up.

He's either Simers or a man with strange heroes. I can see finding Simers amusing, but I can't imagine dedicating myself to protecting his honor before the, um, philistines who can't or won't appreciate his genius.

And where the #### is Nieporent? I heard that Simers violated 4 different California statutes with this column AND he wants to raise taxes.
   146. SoSH U at work Posted: March 24, 2011 at 03:58 PM (#3777234)
Seeing Thames' quick turnaround, and considering the only one of us I know of who's actually met Simers raves about what a great guy he is, I wonder if maybe Simers comes across as a much bigger dick in his columns than he does to the athletes he's interviewing. It's only logical to think that if he really was this big an ####### to these athletes in real life, then everyone would ignore him (and surely one would have said screw it and decked him by now). That he does get many of them to deal with him hints at the possibility that he's more far more disarming and engaging in person than he presents himself in print.
   147. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: March 24, 2011 at 04:04 PM (#3777240)
I guess we can't rule out the possiblity that "philistine" IS Simers, rather than just some elaborate wind-up.

No, he's being too careful with his wording to be Simers. Plaschke maybe?
   148. Randy Jones Posted: March 24, 2011 at 04:11 PM (#3777245)
No, he's being too careful with his wording to be Simers. Plaschke maybe?


Impossible, some of his posts contain paragraphs that are longer than a single sentence.

Seeing Thames' quick turnaround, and considering the only one of us I know of who's actually met Simers raves about what a great guy he is, I wonder if maybe Simers comes across as a much bigger dick in his columns than he does to the athletes he's interviewing. It's only logical to think that if he really was this big an ####### to these athletes in real life, then everyone would ignore him (and surely one would have said screw it and decked him by now). That he does get many of them to deal with him hints at the possibility that he's more far more disarming and engaging in person than he presents himself in print.


In which case he is just a terrible writer and should find another line of work.
   149. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 04:32 PM (#3777266)
I can see finding Simers amusing, but I can't imagine dedicating myself to protecting his honor before the, um, philistines who can't or won't appreciate his genius.

I'm not saying he's a genius. I'm saying he's a satirical writer with a morality and a point to his apparently inane articles. I want more writers to stand up to incompetent management, not fewer. I want more writers to expose what has become normal and expected behavior from athletes as abnormal.

In which case he is just a terrible writer and should find another line of work.

Well, here you may have a point. If the audience don't get him, then maybe it is his fault. But since he has kept his job so long, I assume he is doing something right for his employers. And besides it is funny and becomes part of the joke when the people around him don't get his humor, as Borat showed. Take Borat out of that context and he has not much to offer at all. I think Simers is funnier than Borat, but YMMV.
   150. Lassus Posted: March 24, 2011 at 04:38 PM (#3777274)
I want more writers to stand up to incompetent management, not fewer.

Well, then harassing the people they hired is exactly the opposite of standing up to management, it's being too cowardly to directly ask these OF management in the same manner because he doesn't want to lose his press pass.

This article is standing up to nobody.
   151. Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt! Posted: March 24, 2011 at 04:41 PM (#3777276)
I want more writers to expose what has become normal and expected behavior from athletes as abnormal.

Were you spat on or molested by a ball player? I guess I just don't get your passion for the subject. If you find athletes so reprehensible then why pay attention at all? There is a whole world of reality show contestants, musicians, hedge fund managers and celebrity chefs out there where egotism and misbehavior simply will not be tolerated.
   152. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:05 PM (#3777292)
Well, then harassing the people they hired is exactly the opposite of standing up to management, it's being too cowardly to directly ask these OF management in the same manner because he doesn't want to lose his press pass.

Have you read the article? You don't think he's hard enough on the LA owners? You don't think he's harsher with Mattingly than Tims Tems?

I guess I just don't get your passion for the subject

I'm not passionate about it, but I like the inherent honesty. And I passionately hate the way politeness is preferred to honesty. Your reactions are generally about his lack of politeness. Not about the questions he asks, but the "insulting" way he asks them.

The only thing I liked about Moneyball was the insight I got into the players and atmosphere in the dressing room. I like Simers' pictures of what happens in LA and don't want what he does to be shut down as I see him as a one-of-a-kind, the funniest sports writer out there in a world of humorless earnest bullshit.

I think the insults he gets on here are uncalled for and I jump to his defense because I think you don't all understand what he does. What he does to Tems has actually made me think, well why don't the management know how to pronounce his name? Why did nobody tell him to work on his defense? Could he have had a career as a starting OF if he had worked on his defense or not been labelled a DH? Why didn't Tems stand up for himself and say I can play LF, or my name is pronounced Tems? My reaction was not what a douche this guy is for putting into words what the management (don't) say about him.
   153. Darren Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:11 PM (#3777296)
I hope Simers doesn't read that link about Thames and his mom. It might inspire a "Hey, Tim, why did it take your mom getting paralyzed for you to care about baseball?" or "Hey, your mom's paralysis inspired you... to become a really crappy player? Why do you hate your mom?"
   154. Lassus Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:19 PM (#3777305)
Have you read the article? You don't think he's hard enough on the LA owners? You don't think he's harsher with Mattingly than Tims Tems?

By "incompetent management" I probably mistook what you meant for "front office"


What he does to Tems has actually made me think, well why don't the management know how to pronounce his name? Why did nobody tell him to work on his defense? Could he have had a career as a starting OF if he had worked on his defense or not been labelled a DH? Why didn't Tems stand up for himself and say I can play LF, or my name is pronounced Tems?

So exactly what kind of clever honesty are you promoting by refusing to write his name correctly, when you obviously know what it is?
   155. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:26 PM (#3777316)
This article is standing up to nobody.


If you know of a more pointed piece than this against baseball management from a beat reporter, please post a link:

Mattingly says Tims/Tems will start against left-handers, while indicating he has no idea who will start against right-handers. He probably has to call Joe Torre first.

But as you can see, excitement is building for opening day — maybe opening day a year or two from now.

WITH SIX days remaining in the Dodgers' stay here and 10 days before he starts paying players, McCourt has yet to make an appearance at the Camelback complex.

If the owner doesn't want to watch the Dodgers, it's hard to make the case that fans should buy tickets to see them play.
   156. phredbird Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:30 PM (#3777329)
this, still?

thames engaging simers is very telling. i honestly don't know why everybody here is getting their panties in a bunch over some locker room level d-baggery from simers when it's apparent that thames himself isn't really taking offense.

i'd like to hear why you think that instead of just making a declaration.

He's further making the point with every post. And I justified my opinion when I expressed it originally - every time philistine mentions or defines satire or irony he is SO clearly describing his own posts that I don't see how anybody is still allowing themselves to get tweaked instead of laughing along.


because they don't get it?
   157. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:33 PM (#3777332)
So exactly what kind of clever honesty are you promoting by refusing to write his name correctly, when you obviously know what it is?

OK, once more. The joke is that the Dodgers are so pleased with this guy Tims because he hits HRs so regularly, the 27th best in baseball history. Simers thinks, 27th best, well he must be famous, but then the guy says his name is Tems. Now I never heard of him, so I don't know who to believe.

This is done, IMO, to get a laugh, maybe a cheap one, but it is also done to expose the Dodgers' lack of real interest in the guy. They also say they have an OF prospect and they don't want to clog up LF with anyone good in the meantime to get in his way. So what is the real truth of their statement? What message is that sending to the fans? Look, McCourt isn't interested, why should we be?
   158. Nasty Nate Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:35 PM (#3777335)
I'm not passionate about it, but I like the inherent honesty. And I passionately hate the way politeness is preferred to honesty.


Lack of tact does not equal honesty. I did not always know this.
   159. Lassus Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:38 PM (#3777338)
OK, once more. The joke is that the Dodgers are so pleased with this guy Tims because he hits HRs so regularly, the 27th best in baseball history. Simers thinks, 27th best, well he must be famous, but then the guy says his name is Tems. Now I never heard of him, so I don't know who to believe.

This is done, IMO, to get a laugh, maybe a cheap one, but it is also done to expose the Dodgers' lack of real interest in the guy. They also say they have an OF prospect and they don't want to clog up LF with anyone good in the meantime to get in his way. So what is the real truth of their statement? What message is that sending to the fans? Look, McCourt isn't interested, why should we be?

You have already explained Simers' endless shtick with the name. My question wasn't about that. I was asking why you are endlessly doing it.
   160. flournoy Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:51 PM (#3777362)
I don't think anyone here is in any danger of not "getting" Simers. That's really not very difficult, no matter how you flatter yourself to think you're high-brow. The issue is that most of us find his work distasteful.
   161. Eddo Posted: March 24, 2011 at 05:56 PM (#3777372)
I question the validity of the mispronunciation. Couldn't it just be an accent-related issue? Doesn't everyone know a few people who pronounce milk "mElk" or Megan "MAYgan"? "Tims" and "Tems" are close enough to where it might not be an issue of the Dodgers' PR person not knowing how to pronounce it.
   162. SoSH U at work Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:04 PM (#3777388)
Megan "MAYgan


Virtually everyone I've ever known pronounces Megan "MAYgan" Those who prefer Me-gan are weird.
   163. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:06 PM (#3777392)
I was asking why you are endlessly doing it.

That wasn't clear in the question.

I was amused by the conceit and I repeated it. It was unnecessary to use it on several occasions but necessary to make a point on others. I apologize to anyone called Thames. But hopefully people now will know how to say your name correctly.
   164. phredbird Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:16 PM (#3777405)
I don't think anyone here is in any danger of not "getting" Simers. That's really not very difficult, no matter how you flatter yourself to think you're high-brow. The issue is that most of us find his work distasteful.


um ... re-read my post 156 carefully. i wasn't referring to anybody not getting simers.

and you know me, you've seen my posts here for quite some time. you suggesting that i think of myself as high brow says more about you than it does me. i don't know why these discussions eventually get personal.
   165. CrosbyBird Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:19 PM (#3777413)
And I passionately hate the way politeness is preferred to honesty. Your reactions are generally about his lack of politeness. Not about the questions he asks, but the "insulting" way he asks them.

The two are not mutually exclusive. I prefer that people be both honest and polite.

I had a student last night who said, after a 3:15 class in which he asked no questions, "I'm frustrated with this class because I'm completely lost, and I work, so I have no time to study outside of class." He's not going to succeed. Here's what I said to him, more or less:

"You can't come up to me at the end of the class and tell me that you were completely lost with everything because it's too late for me to help you and you've wasted a whole session. I understand that you're frustrated, but you will not be able to master this material if you're not putting in the time out of class, unless you are a natural talent, which you've discovered that, like most of the world, you are not. You won't know which questions to ask me and I won't be able to help you effectively. You can see that you're behind most of the other people in the class, and that means that you're going to have to work harder than some of them to get where you want to go. If you can't put in the out of class time, you probably shouldn't take the exam in June."

Here's what I could have said:

"It makes sense. You're not really very bright, and you're not doing any serious work. The other people in the class are better than you because they are smarter and working harder. I expect that you won't get any better at this material and should abandon your dream of being a lawyer because you clearly don't want it enough. It's ridiculous for you to complain to me that you're frustrated with the pace of the class when you don't stop me to ask questions. I've made it very clear that I want to hear from everyone who is at all confused, and you should be ashamed of yourself for complaining to me about struggling when you've done nothing inside or outside of class to help yourself."

To some degree, I don't have the luxury of being completely blunt because my job is to teach this student, but I don't think I sugar-coated the situation a drop more than I would with that luxury. Despite not letting him off the hook, I'm fairly confident that he left the conversation feeling better rather than worse. Do you think I did him a disservice?
   166. rr Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:19 PM (#3777414)
and considering the only one of us I know of who's actually met Simers raves about what a great guy he is, I wonder if maybe Simers comes across as a much bigger dick in his columns than he does to the athletes he's interviewing.


Simers may well be a great guy in terms of how he conducts his personal life and how he treats fellow employees at the Times. He is not without skill as a writer; he used to write "straight" columns and occasionally still does.

This is done, IMO, to get a laugh, maybe a cheap one, but it is also done to expose the Dodgers' lack of real interest in the guy. They also say they have an OF prospect and they don't want to clog up LF with anyone good in the meantime to get in his way. So what is the real truth of their statement? What message is that sending to the fans? Look, McCourt isn't interested, why should we be?


IMO it is actually done to get people to do what we are doing now: talk and write about Simers. Gonfalon put it well--Simers' shtick is "set in stone" and whatever the target in question does, Simers writes the same column and "wins."

But if we are assume that:

a) You are not trolling
b) You are correct about Simers' complex, multifaceted, fan-friendly motivations, rather than pissing on Thames, Simers should man up, show some balls, and get in Coletti's and McCourt's faces about it, perhaps by saying something like, "Do you as crappy a job of owning the Dodgers as you did running your marriage?" or "Is this signing half as dumb as your stupidity in signing Juan Pierre, even though it costs a lot less? Why should Dodger fans trust you any more?"
   167. flournoy Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:22 PM (#3777421)
#164: I actually wasn't referring to you or your previous post. I wasn't very clear about that; I apologize. I was trying to address some of the contentions in 149 and 152.
   168. Charles S. is pretty fast for an old guy Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:25 PM (#3777428)
And I passionately hate the way politeness is preferred to honesty.
In human interaction there are a few occasions where honesty is preferable to politeness, but in most cases politeness is far preferable. All introductory conversations I've ever had with someone in a workplace called for politeness over honesty. Short of a chemical leak or toilet paper on your shoe, it's hard to imagine a scenario where honesty would trump politeness in an initial meeting.
   169. CrosbyBird Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:25 PM (#3777430)
Virtually everyone I've ever known pronounces Megan "MAYgan" Those who prefer Me-gan are weird.

ME-gan? I've never heard that.

Most people I know say MEH-gehn.
   170. Swedish Chef Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:31 PM (#3777440)
B) You are correct about Simers' complex, multifaceted, fan-friendly motivations, rather than pissing on Thames, Simers should man up, show some balls, and get in Coletti's and McCourt's faces about it, perhaps by saying something like, "Do you as crappy a job of owning the Dodgers as you did running your marriage?"

Had to search BBTF for that :-)

Sadly, “Mr. McCourt still chooses not to speak with you.”
   171. SoSH U at work Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:33 PM (#3777442)
Simers may well be a great guy in terms of how he conducts his personal life and how he treats fellow employees at the Times. He is not without skill as a writer; he used to write "straight" columns and occasionally still does.


What I'm saying is, the fact that he gets athletes to engage him suggests to me that he might not come across as dickish in real life interactions with the athletes as his words suggest. That there's something engaging or disarming about his approach in person that doesn't come across when described by him in the paper*

* It's also possible, to answer Randy's point above, that he, for some reason, wants to appear to be a bigger dick in describing his interactions with these athletes.
   172. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:34 PM (#3777445)
In human interaction there are a few occasions where honesty is preferable to politeness, but in most cases politeness is far preferable.

It makes you wonder what might have happened to Thames' career if someone had sat down with him and said: "You have the potential to be the 25th best HR hitter of all time. How bad are you on defense that teams don’t dare risk playing you?"

But no, much better not to say anything.
   173. Lassus Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:35 PM (#3777448)
ME-gan? I've never heard that.
Most people I know say MEH-gehn.


We need IPA characters for this discussion.
   174. Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:40 PM (#3777453)
I have known two people who pronounced it ME-gan. Both were much too impressed with themselves.
   175. Nasty Nate Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:42 PM (#3777456)
It makes you wonder what might have happened to Thames' career if someone had sat down with him and said: "You have the potential to be the 25th best HR hitter of all time. How bad are you on defense that teams don’t dare risk playing you?"

But no, much better not to say anything.


hahahahaha.
   176. Charles S. is pretty fast for an old guy Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:48 PM (#3777466)
In human interaction there are a few occasions where honesty is preferable to politeness, but in most cases politeness is far preferable.

It makes you wonder what might have happened to Thames' career if someone had sat down with him and said: "You have the potential to be the 25th best HR hitter of all time. How bad are you on defense that teams don’t dare risk playing you?"

But no, much better not to say anything.


If you think those are the only two possibilities, I have to wonder if you have ever spoken to anyone in a professional setting. On the other hand, if you're trolling, you got me.
   177. phredbird Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:48 PM (#3777467)
#164: I actually wasn't referring to you or your previous post. I wasn't very clear about that; I apologize. I was trying to address some of the contentions in 149 and 152.


that's what i get for thinking the world revolves around me!

anyway, i would like to just gently defend philistine here because i still think he's making valid points. let me give some of my impressions:

first, i don't think anybody here will deny -- including philistine -- that simers acts like a d-bag sometimes. however, i feel that we are not necessarily aware of how that act goes over in the dodgers locker room. that is, it might sound to us like he's a complete jerk from reading his columns, and we don't see that in the context of the dodger club house his tone might actually be acceptable. it ain't kindergarten in there. thames is getting along with simers in the second column. again, i think that's a telling sign.

second, because of that disconnect i think its a valid point to suggest that simers is not as good a writer as he thinks he is. even philistine has acknowledged that. but i also think it might be true that simers knows he comes off as a jerk and exploits it to get people reading and commenting on his columns. if that were true and i was his editor my response would be 'keep it up, bro. we gotta sell papers.' a cynical pov, but if you've ever worked at a newspaper, you'd know that that is standard operating procedure.

finally, i think its also getting lost here as to how much simers slams dodger management. he's not saving his jerkiness for the players. jeez, from reading his stuff one gets the impression that don mattingly is a deer in the headlights (an impression that i sometimes get after watching some of his work for the dodgers). and don't even get started about what he writes about the mccourts. that is some rough stuff.

and yet ... and yet ... nobody punches him in the nose, he isn't banned from the dodger clubhouse, sandy koufax and joe torre agree to sit with him in a public forum. are we missing something?

i might not be around for anymore of this. i'm on deadline. happy baseball, to steal a line from another old poster.
   178. Nasty Nate Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:49 PM (#3777469)
IMO it is actually done to get people to do what we are doing now: talk and write about Simers. Gonfalon put it well--Simers' shtick is "set in stone" and whatever the target in question does, Simers writes the same column and "wins."


Yes, this is it exactly.
   179. rr Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:50 PM (#3777471)
What I'm saying is, the fact that he gets athletes to engage him suggests to me that he might not come across as dickish in real life interactions with the athletes as his words suggest.


I got that. Some athletes (Brian Fuentes, for example) have told him to shove it. Phil Jackson has decided to play; Kobe Bryant used to but now doesn't AFAIK. I think Thames asked someone about it and decided to play. Telling Simers to shove his gag up his ass and stay away, as McCourt, via a spokesman, apparently did, is also an "adult response" IMO.
   180. Eddo Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:52 PM (#3777473)
To clarify, I meant names spelled "Megan" and "Meghan". I generally say those as "MEH-gan". I've heard others pronounce them as "MAY-gan".

The names spelled "Meegan" and "Meeghan" are generally pronounced "MEE-gan".
   181. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:52 PM (#3777474)
Re: not "getting it"--
The problem here is that the conceptual humor is operating at such a high plane. That level of comedy can't help but soar over the heads of the normals. I mean, what an article. What a string of punchlines. There are so many exquisite gems per column inch that it's impossible to decide which is the most perfect. Truly, he's "the funniest sportswriter out there."
   182. SoSH U at work Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:54 PM (#3777477)
Telling Simers to shove his gag up his ass and stay away, as McCourt, via a spokesman, apparently did, is also
an "adult response" IMO.


I agree, I would have no problem with that response. I just wonder if Simers comes across as less of a d-bag and more of a chop-buster in person. And I'd guess it's more of the latter, because otherwise I can't imagine why anyone would talk to him.
   183. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 06:55 PM (#3777479)
If you think those are the only two possibilities, I have to wonder if you have ever spoken to anyone in a professional setting. On the other hand, if you're trolling, you got me.

Simers is a journalist. Supposedly his job is to get the truth. Or is it a journalist's job to be polite? Now, you're going to say that the best way of getting the truth is to be civil, but Simers does it a different way.

Thanks Chef. I LOVE that:

Frank McCourt.

I just like typing those two words because I know how it rattles him to see them appear on Page 2.

McCourt has never figured out Page 2, the relationship on the rocks from the first meeting, when he said, “Dodger fans are the greatest in all sports,” or something mushy like that and I interrupted, wanting to know what he would have told Red Sox fans had his attempt to buy the team been successful.

He likes fluffy prose, specific questions almost always deferred for another time that never materializes. I’ve never been a fan of lofty rhetoric, and I would guess his idea of newspaper downsizing would be going from Page 1 in Sports to Page 3.
   184. rr Posted: March 24, 2011 at 07:02 PM (#3777486)
Simers is a journalist.


My man SoSH can correct me here; this is his field, but I think Simers is a "columnist" whose job is to get readers, and he does that with his gag, rather than a truth-seeking "journalist".

And, as noted, if he wants to pull this kind of thing, keep taking on bigger LA targets: Kobe. Phil. Mattingly. McCourt. Colletti. Ben Howland. Jerry Buss. Matt Kemp. Picking on a veteran part-time player is IMO stupid.
   185. SoSH U at work Posted: March 24, 2011 at 07:08 PM (#3777490)
My man SoSH can correct me here; this is his field, but I think Simers is a "columnist" whose job is to get readers, and he does that with his gag, rather than a truth-seeking "journalist".


Yes, as he's acting here, he's not a journalist. He's a columnist. If he can provide some insight into the Dodgers or their players that's a nice bonus, but his primary job is to write stuff about sports that the readers enjoy and seek out (or hate and seek out). It's not about an objective reporting of news that (should) govern the work of others at the paper.
   186. Charles S. is pretty fast for an old guy Posted: March 24, 2011 at 07:19 PM (#3777504)
I'm not sure what grand truth this journalist is hoping to get at by ambushing a marginal ballplayer, but I'm sure it made him feel like a big man.
   187. MY PAIN IS NOT A HOLIDAY (CoB). Posted: March 24, 2011 at 07:31 PM (#3777522)
So far, the only truth I've gleaned from these two columns is that Marcus Thames is a far classier human being than TJ Simers, but even that's not much in the way of insight since, having lived in LA for 20 years and read and heard plenty from Simers and having read about and watched Thames when he played for the Yankees last year, that much was obvious from the start ...
   188. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 07:45 PM (#3777546)
Picking on a veteran part-time player is IMO stupid

Why might he choose him? Because Simers is lazy and Thames was the first person who walked past? Quite possibly. But the treatment is not accidental. The butt of the jokes is only Thames when the guy walks away from a provocative question. I think it is a fair question to ask a veteran athlete who seems to be the team's choice to fill a hole in LF. You think it's rude. The question was professional and pertinent, but phrased in a way that was shocking and offensive. But a professional athlete should be used to dealing with that sort of thing, they get training on how to handle the media, (but of course they are trained how to not say anything). Thames has since admitted he didn't handle it well. He reacted badly, thought about it and had the good grace to admit it. Note in all this, that Simers has reported things as they happened. He is aware of how people will judge him from the questioning. This shows a humble and honest approach, full of integrity in its own way.

A lot of you seem to have RTFA and come away with the impression that the article is picking on Thames. It isn't. It is picking on the Dodgers management, as they all do except when they pick on the Angels, from Mattingly to Colletti to McCourt. Thames is the choice they have made and he is used as a weapon to beat on McCourt etc. That is unfortunate for Thames, but what can you do to criticize the team's choice other than point out a player's shortcomings? It's what we do here. We are supposedly looking for baseball truths on BTF and yet we criticize one of the few journalists who does that. We want earnest stat reporting not barbed comments about lazy managers.

I'm not sure what grand truth this journalist is hoping to get at by ambushing a marginal ballplayer, but I'm sure it made him feel like a big man.

Not a grand truth, we're talking about baseball teams, but please read the discussion again.

So far, the only truth I've gleaned from these two columns is that Marcus Thames is a far classier human being than TJ Simers

I think it is the virtue of being "classy" that I object to. Give me the barbed satirist holding a mirror to the vices of society rather than the polite gentleman who wants to be everyone's friend any day. You see, I went away and made some changes.
   189. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 24, 2011 at 08:00 PM (#3777564)
the barbed satirist holding a mirror to the vices of society

Not much besides T.J. Simers gets into T.J. Simers' mirror.
   190. Nasty Nate Posted: March 24, 2011 at 08:03 PM (#3777565)
"barbed satirist" hahaha haha. He's a Mariotti/Shaughnessy type all the way. He wants to be part of the story. And he wants to get attention/page hits by antagonizing the readership. Look at the comments on the LA Times page, they are all angry. The column succeeded in getting a rise out of people, and got people to click on it and spend time thinking about Simers; let's not pretend he had any truth that he was trying to get across about Dodgers ownership or the arrogance of ballplayers etc. It is newspaper trolling 101.
   191. Charles S. is pretty fast for an old guy Posted: March 24, 2011 at 08:06 PM (#3777575)
Phil, you seem to think we're all missing your point. We're not. We just don't think Simers is the man you think he is. You see a brilliant satirist who knocks the powerful off their high horses. I see a bully who ambushed a marginal ballplayer. Telling someone he sucks is not insight or satire (unless you're satirizing baseball analysis), it's just a mean-spirited publicity stunt.

Satire is Stephen Colbert who plays a character and mocks the powerful, in the tradition of Swift, Twain and Thurber. "I was just being honest" is the weak-ass defense of the 13-year-old smartass who mocks his c-student classmate. 30 years ago I was that smartass, and I would have been on your side of this argument. Nowadays, I just look at who the bully is, and I find the wrong side of any discussion.
   192. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 08:17 PM (#3777594)
He's a Mariotti/Shaughnessy type all the way.

Please give examples of his similarities to Mariotti and Shaughnessy.

He wants to be part of the story

And? Someone explained that he is a columnist. That's his prerogative. He writes a column about his time with the Dodgers.

And he wants to get attention/page hits by antagonizing the readership. Look at the comments on the LA Times page, they are all angry.

But they are from people like you.

Not much besides T.J. Simers gets into T.J. Simers' mirror

Well played sir.
   193. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 08:22 PM (#3777598)
30 years ago I was that smartass, and I would have been on your side of this argument

30 years ago I was the classy guy looking for approval from everyone around me trying to say things I thought they wanted to hear.
   194. Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms Posted: March 24, 2011 at 08:33 PM (#3777611)
Please give examples of his similarities to Mariotti and Shaughnessy.


Great article where Simers insulted someone to generate attention and make himself part of the story, the classic Shaughnessy move.
   195. MY PAIN IS NOT A HOLIDAY (CoB). Posted: March 24, 2011 at 08:34 PM (#3777613)
Give me the barbed satirist holding a mirror to the vices of society rather than the polite gentleman who wants to be everyone's friend any day.


Nice binary strawman you've invented there.

The only baseball truth to see here is something that Simers conspicuously has missed: that Thames is almost certain to provide more value to the Dodgers with the things he can do than he will (actively) subtract with the things he can't.

Of course, the reason for that is that this isn't really about Thames (and whatever value he might *actually* provide the team) at all for Simers, Thames is just a stick to beat management with.

*Obnoxiously* asking a part-time platoon player why he isn't a full-time player is as pointless and trite as *obnoxiously* asking a short reliever why he isn't a 7 inning starter.
   196. Nasty Nate Posted: March 24, 2011 at 08:36 PM (#3777617)
Please give examples of his similarities to Mariotti and Shaughnessy.


- he wants to be part of the story
- he gets attention by intentionally antagonizing his readership
- writing filled with bitterness and negativity
- unfunny player nicknames (YMMV)
- doesn't seem to have much baseball wisdom
   197. Swedish Chef Posted: March 24, 2011 at 09:04 PM (#3777646)
We're not. We just don't think Simers is the man you think he is.

Is that a royal we, or do you just want to howl along with the mob?
   198. Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn) Posted: March 24, 2011 at 09:55 PM (#3777686)
He reacted badly

Disagree. He took the high road.

Note in all this, that Simers has reported things as they happened.

Possibly, but you have no idea. The "snit" remark makes me think his rendering is not accurate.

Thames is the choice they have made and he is used as a weapon to beat on McCourt etc.

If he's such a high-minded speaker of truth to power, then perhaps he should take it up with those decision-makers.

Give me the barbed satirist holding a mirror to the vices of society rather than-

Okay, I'm done.
   199. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 10:03 PM (#3777694)
Nate, those are your opinions, not examples.
   200. philistine Posted: March 24, 2011 at 10:06 PM (#3777699)
*Obnoxiously* asking a part-time platoon player why he isn't a full-time player is as pointless and trite as *obnoxiously* asking a short reliever why he isn't a 7 inning starter.

What if that reliever's k rate was the 27th best in baseball history?
Page 2 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogWhat Does Endeavor, Silver Lake’s Push Into Baseball Mean For the Minors?
(12 - 9:20am, Dec 07)
Last: sanny manguillen

Sox TherapyLocked Out and Semi-Loaded
(18 - 9:14am, Dec 07)
Last: jacksone (AKA It's OK...)

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - Domestic Cups, Congested Fixture Lists and Winter Breaks
(47 - 9:04am, Dec 07)
Last: jmurph

NewsblogMajor League Baseball is headed for a lockout. Is Ted Cruz the only one who can stop it?
(8 - 7:28am, Dec 07)
Last: sotapop

NewsblogMinnie, Gil, Buck among 6 elected to Hall
(89 - 7:18am, Dec 07)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogRed Sox, Astros Interested In Trevor Story
(3 - 6:08am, Dec 07)
Last: Walt Davis

Hall of MeritJoe DiMaggio
(39 - 2:15am, Dec 07)
Last: The Honorable Ardo

NewsblogA’s reportedly eyeing Tropicana site for possible Strip ballpark
(29 - 12:48am, Dec 07)
Last: The Honorable Ardo

NewsblogOT - College Football Bowl Spectacular (December 2021 - January 2022)
(30 - 12:33am, Dec 07)
Last: The Honorable Ardo

NewsblogHere is Mets' preliminary list of managerial candidates
(12 - 12:01am, Dec 07)
Last: The Honorable Ardo

NewsblogNBA 2021-2022 Season Thread
(1281 - 10:20pm, Dec 06)
Last: spivey 2

NewsblogMcCaffery: Jimmy Rollins, Ryan Howard passed Hall of Fame eye test
(104 - 9:26pm, Dec 06)
Last: LargeBill

NewsblogOT - NHL Thread
(36 - 8:00pm, Dec 06)
Last: Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms

NewsblogBaseball Hall of Fame ballot 2022: Alex Rodriguez, David Ortiz join; Bonds, Clemens, Schilling in final year
(98 - 6:21pm, Dec 06)
Last: dark

NewsblogMLB, union stopped blood testing for HGH due to pandemic
(37 - 1:45pm, Dec 06)
Last: Ben Broussard Ramjet

Page rendered in 0.5491 seconds
48 querie(s) executed