Jon Heyman: Beholden to No One

Rich Lederer of Baseball Analysts shreds a writer for some magazine that some people apparently still read.

over 3 years ago Matt Klaassen 26 comments 0 recs |

Comments

I got a subscription to SI

Just because I wanted the KU championship DVD and I wanted some bathroom reading material. I think I liked SI as a kid because there weren’t many outlets for sports information. But with the internet now, the magazine is a complete bore. Its stuff that happened days ago that I’ve already read a bunch of analysis about.

The only good thing about it is they cover sports I don’t really follow much – hockey, tennis, boxing, and its kinda interesting to read about that stuff when you’re dropping a deuce.

Even the quality of writing doesn’t seem that great. Mitch Albom had a piece on Detroit a few weeks ago that I thought was terrible, there was a piece on Cubs fans a few months ago that was darn near incomprehensible, and then there’s Rick Reilly.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 2, 2009 11:52 AM EST reply actions

I thought Rick Reilly quit his column

I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.

by kcscoliny on Feb 2, 2009 12:19 PM EST up reply actions

You're right

And they added JoPo, so its not all bad news.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 2, 2009 1:40 PM EST up reply actions

that's the equivalent of replacing Ross Gload with Albert Pujols

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 2, 2009 1:44 PM EST up reply actions

Hmmmm

I wouldn’t go that far. JoPo is a good writer, but only a mediocre analyst. So I’d say it is more like replacing Ross Gload with Carlos Pena.

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Feb 2, 2009 1:48 PM EST up reply actions

I'd say its Miguel Cabrera

JoPo is probably weighin about that much

I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.

by kcscoliny on Feb 2, 2009 1:51 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

I guess I see "writer" and "analyst" as two different categories

I don’t go to JoPo for analysis, although, frankly, I’d bet $10 he’s the best one who has ever been a regular for SI.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 2, 2009 2:09 PM EST up reply actions

But writing isn't just about the prose

It’s about the content too. To be a good writer, you have to sound good, but also have some meaningful content. That is, unless you only write light, airy puff pieces. And JoPo doesn’t limit himself to that. At least at the Star, he writes analytical pieces about how good teams, players and coaches are. He analyzes trades and signings. And his analysis is just ok.

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Feb 2, 2009 2:12 PM EST up reply actions

I’m probably not being clear, or this is a difference in taste. Probably a bit from column “A” and “B.”

I guess I think when I go somewhere for the sort of analysis I prefer, it will be Fangraphs, The Book Blog, BtBS, THT, Prospectus, or something like that. I go to Posnanski for something different. Yeah, he has some pieces that are better than others (Jermaine Dye was not a great subject for Joe…), but I really find his human interest pieces much more, I dunno, palatable.

And I also think he’s informed enough to know his limits. When he invents a silly stat to evaluate things, he admits it’s a silly stat and that he’s just having fun to see what happens. He knows he isn’t a sabermetrician, but also tries to be informed by it. I think his BaseRuns blog entry is a good example — he is just getting into it, and admits he doesn’t know much. Yes, David Smyth or Brandon Heipp (sp?) or Colin Wyers or Tango or Justin or whomever is a better source to get the technical details, but Joe has probably introduced sabermetrics in a readable and understandable (and humble) way to a lot of people who wouldn’t have gotten into it, or would have been turned off by a more technical presentation.

And I think he’s learned enough from talking to baseball people and sabermetrics people (although those people are part of the same group) that his analysis, while certainly not on the level as Nate Silver’s or Dave Cameron’s or [insert name here], is far beyond what we would think of as his peer group — Olney, Rosenthal, Heyman, and even Gammons. And unlike Gammons, Posnanski does a fair (if not perfect) job of not being used as a mouthpiece by his hometown team.

But that’s just my opinion and taste, ymmv.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 2, 2009 2:27 PM EST up reply actions

I agree

He’s good at what he’s good at. I just think the Albert Pujols of baseball writers would be someone who is great all around, someone who writes well, but also is a particularly good analyst (not necessarily a Tom Tango-quality sabermetrician, but at least a Rob Neyer-quality).

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Feb 2, 2009 2:36 PM EST up reply actions

To be fair

I heard that Pujols pees on guys in the shower

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 2, 2009 2:54 PM EST up reply actions

JoPo too

…so maybe they’re more alike than I thought.

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Feb 2, 2009 2:58 PM EST up reply actions

JoPo doesn't write analysis for SI

Its more entertainment. I don’t think SI does much of any analysis except Dr. Z, who pretty much just throws darts at a wall.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 2, 2009 3:12 PM EST up reply actions

Oh, you mean

Bill James.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Feb 2, 2009 7:29 PM EST up reply actions

quote: "Heyman is a tool for..."

Glad somebody agrees with me about Tooly McToolface.

by DarthYoshi on Feb 2, 2009 12:11 PM EST reply actions

Sounds like someone is upset they don't work for SI

These guys ripping SI, ESPN, Fox, etc is tired and old. They are paid to push readers and ratings and Boras clients do that. There is a reason that all these publications and tv channels have Hot Stove updates and shows dedicated to it. The Adam Schefters, Chris Mortensons, John Heymans and Rosenthals have a difficult job trying to be the first to break stories and yes sometimes they are gonna be pawns to their sources obviously there is a give and take to their jobs.

I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.

by kcscoliny on Feb 2, 2009 12:14 PM EST reply actions

Often many of the writers, broadcasters and commentators at SI, ESPN, Fox, etc. actually deserve criticism

You may feel like it is “tired and old,” but the criticism is well earned. It’s also “tired and old” to talk about how TPJ really sucks as a baseball player, but that doesn’t mean that the criticisms of him are not well founded.

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Feb 2, 2009 1:33 PM EST up reply actions

It's idiotic

He should pick up a phone and get in the game and see how well he does at it. He works for a baseball website and would increase his traffic flow if he could do the job with proficiency. Its the same old tired argument that someone put on the Royal Review bashing of his affiliate pieces. If you don’t like what’s on turn the channel. He reads Heymans pieces obviously because he has all the knowledge of his mistakes but acts like Heyman doesn’t have to do something for these agents/management types for breaking stories true stories.

I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.

by kcscoliny on Feb 2, 2009 1:46 PM EST up reply actions

It's idiotic to criticize how well a national sports writer does his job?

Please. Heyman is a public figure who is very deserving of criticism. That’s why lots of people criticize him. He just doesn’t do his job very well at all.

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Feb 2, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions

His jealousy oozes off the screen

Manny is the biggest story in the game and really has been all offseason and last season but he wants Heyman to speculate more accurately. Why didn’t he do the same with Rosenthal or Gammons, Stark, etc? Their jobs lead to inaccuracies and getting puppeteered. This isn’t 1975 where you verify and reverify before you break a story on tomorrows front page. This is the day of A.D.D and short memories break the story and if it is wrong write a new story and slide in a retraction if you want. If he doesn’t like it don’t go to SI.com.

I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.

by kcscoliny on Feb 2, 2009 2:00 PM EST up reply actions

I'm sorry, but so many people criticize Heyman. It isn't about jealousy.

Many fans, readers and common folk like us criticize Heyman all the time. Are all of those people just jealous of him? He’s a rumor monger and not even a particularly good one. And his attempts at analysis (like saying which players are good and which are not) are laughably incompetent. Of all of the national baseball writers, he’s arguably the worst. So singling him out for criticism makes a lot of sense.

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Feb 2, 2009 2:06 PM EST up reply actions

He’s a rumor monger

That’s his job

I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.

by kcscoliny on Feb 2, 2009 2:10 PM EST up reply actions

Right

And he’s not very good at it. And he’s not good at anything else he writes about either (like analysis and player evaluation).

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Feb 2, 2009 2:13 PM EST up reply actions

I didn’t mean to start a fight over this.

There is something there with Lederer on Heyman, but I’d say that it probably has much more to due with Heyman’s remarks about Bert Blyleven than with jealousy.

Just my two cents.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 2, 2009 2:14 PM EST up reply actions