PDA

View Full Version : Daugherty on Dunn



Wheelhouse
03-02-2007, 06:50 PM
More good news...

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/daugherty/

BoydsOfSummer
03-02-2007, 11:05 PM
Friday, March 02, 2007
my new friend Adam

SARASOTA -- spring training is about new starts, so I figured it was time to patch things up w/Adam Dunn... occasionally, writers and players have problems with each other... usually they pass... ours lingered, which was dumb, because Dunn is among the most engaging and self-effacing Reds, not to mention one of the most important. So when I asked Dunn today if we could bury the hatchet, he didn't bury it in my head. We had a great talk, he seems a changed guy. More serious about the player he can be, more aware that his vast potential was going a little untapped. More mature, generally. Good for him. Good for the Reds. I'll write about him for Sunday's paper. Meantime, it feels good to patch things up.

posted by Paul Daugherty at 1:57 PM 1 comments

vaticanplum
03-02-2007, 11:45 PM
This is a part of modern journalism that I hate. I don't care about your hatchets, Paul; I would rather see you focus on good factual writing, something that has been slipping away from you in recent years. I appreciate that he's trying to put a good spin in things here, but I really think it's best if there's no spin in that sense at all. Writers' personal relationships with players are of no concern of mine and I don't think they should be. Instead of using your personal relationship with Dunn as evidence that he seems soooo much more mature, why don't you use, you know, sporting anecdotes and facts, the way sports journalists are supposed to? I smell laziness.

I applaud the way the internet has facilitated communication between public figures and the people they serve, but you can do that without being personal.

Old Fart

Chip R
03-02-2007, 11:52 PM
Aaron Altman: Let's never forget, we're the real story, not them.

redsfan30
03-03-2007, 12:12 AM
This is a part of modern journalism that I hate. I don't care about your hatchets, Paul; I would rather see you focus on good factual writing, something that has been slipping away from you in recent years. I appreciate that he's trying to put a good spin in things here, but I really think it's best if there's no spin in that sense at all. Writers' personal relationships with players are of no concern of mine and I don't think they should be. Instead of using your personal relationship with Dunn as evidence that he seems soooo much more mature, why don't you use, you know, sporting anecdotes and facts, the way sports journalists are supposed to? I smell laziness.

I applaud the way the internet has facilitated communication between public figures and the people they serve, but you can do that without being personal.

Old Fart

It's a blog piece, not a front-page article....

:dunno:

vaticanplum
03-03-2007, 12:19 AM
It's a blog piece, not a front-page article....

:dunno:

It's just my opinion. I don't see the point.

CrackerJack
03-03-2007, 12:21 AM
It's a blog piece, not a front-page article....

:dunno:


Yeah this is the trend of the beat writers these here days (online journals).

I don't mind it, but think VP was under the impression it was one of his column pieces possibly.

Dunn, as always, will have an interesting year I'm sure.

Yachtzee
03-03-2007, 12:30 AM
What I want to know is, are those full body shots they use with the blogs the worst they could find. C. Trent looks like he's trying on "big boy" clothes and Daugherty just kind of looks like they grabbed him on the way to doing some work around the house.

Chip R
03-03-2007, 01:33 AM
It's a blog piece, not a front-page article....

:dunno:


Well, no matter what it is, the point is that Daugherty is basically telling his readers - if they read his columns on line, they will most likely read his blog - that since he kissed and made up with Dunn, it's OK to like him now. On Wednesday night, Marty was saying that he and Dunn hadn't spoken yet this spring and he attributes it to the fact that he has been hard on Dunn. So now Reds Fan has a dilemna. Doc says that it's OK to like Dunn now but Marty and Dunn don't even speak. So how should Reds Fan feel about Dunn?

I know beat writers, columnists and broadcasters form relationships - and strong opinions about the people they cover. And it isn't confined to sports either. Ideally those feelings - good or bad - shouldn't show up in their work. Unfortunately, they do and they have a strong influence on not only the fans but the other media as well. Then they are becoming the story and the people they cover are just in the background. I'm not trying to turn this into another Marty bashing thread but if you go back and look at the comments about him, a lot of his admirers who don't mind what he says about players will say that they want to hear more of the ball game and less of the golf stories or the tomato stories or the "I had lunch with so-and-so" stories.

It's one thing to influence a reader or viewer or listener about someone or something be it good or bad. People have been doing that forever. But having someone come out and say, "I like this guy now so you should too" damages the credibility of that person. What if Dunn starts putting up Juan Castroesque numbers and Doc doesn't criticize him? People are going to start thinking that he won't criticize Dunn at all cause he's his pal. They will start to wonder what other things he should be critical about that he hasn't been. They are going to start thinking he's a joke and not read his columns any more.

pedro
03-03-2007, 01:44 AM
I'm gonna have to stand with VP an CHiP on this one.

GAC
03-03-2007, 04:29 AM
Lets see how long it lasts. Sooner or later Daugherty will need some thing to write about. ;)

jmcclain19
03-03-2007, 04:50 AM
http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/blogphotos/daugherty_160x379.jpg

Ron Madden
03-03-2007, 04:52 AM
I'm gonna have to stand with VP an CHiP on this one.

I'm in total agreement with both VP and Chip here.

Every Fan be they "casual" or "diehard" deserves honest and accurate information.

It would seem Boadcasters, writers and sportsqualk host are paid well enough to provide factual and unbiased information. All of these guys have the talent to do that.

The laziness, personal biases, personal grudges and prejudices of these folks are far too often passed onto the gullible misinformed majority of this fanbase. That is not a good thing.

GAC
03-03-2007, 06:00 AM
I'm in total agreement with both VP and Chip here.

Every Fan be they "casual" or "diehard" deserves honest and accurate information.

It would seem Boadcasters, writers and sportsqualk host are paid well enough to provide factual and unbiased information.

That's true. But they also write, or allow, their own personal feelings, viewpoint, and perspective to influence their articles, like an editorial. Is that wrong? I have no problem with that. From there, one can either simply agree or disagree.

The game of baseball has evolved more and more, and has come to be inclusive of various "camps" of thought. We see evidence of that on here with the stat guys and those who are traditionalists. And boy do we all argue back and forth at times. It's almost a type of bias or partisanship that we see in politics where sides are drawn. And if course either side will argue till the moon falls from the sky as to the "rightness" of their position.

And we do the same with beat writers and various other sports commentators who somehow make comments or write an article that "sticks in our craw" or is somehow offensive to our position/thinking.

Ltlabner
03-03-2007, 06:43 AM
So now Reds Fan has a dilemna. Doc says that it's OK to like Dunn now but Marty and Dunn don't even speak. So how should Reds Fan feel about Dunn? .

Once again the idea that fans can't form their own opinions without being told to think by someone in the press is floated.

I really wish I knew where I could meet these weak-willed people who can't decide what to eat for breakfast without being told what to think by someone in the press.

Maybe I could convince them to give me all their money.

Ron Madden
03-03-2007, 06:44 AM
That's true. But they also write, or allow, their own personal feelings, viewpoint, and perspective to influence their articles, like an editorial. Is that wrong? I have no problem with that. From there, one can either simply agree or disagree.

The game of baseball has evolved more and more, and has come to be inclusive of various "camps" of thought. We see evidence of that on here with the stat guys and those who are traditionalists. And boy do we all argue back and forth at times. It's almost a type of bias or partisanship that we see in politics where sides are drawn. And if course either side will argue till the moon falls from the sky as to the "rightness" of their position.

And we do the same with beat writers and various other sports commentators who somehow make comments or write an article that "sticks in our craw" or is somehow offensive to our position/thinking.

Debate is a good thing. It can be very educational if we enter with an open mind. :beerme:

These guys are very well paid. They always use that excuse to hold players accountable, I believe they should be responsible enough to do a little bit of research now and then. With little to no effort or reseach put into their jobs it is often difficult to tell the difference between thier work and the post from Reds.com fan forum. ;)

RedLegSuperStar
03-03-2007, 08:10 AM
my new friend Adam

SARASOTA -- spring training is about new starts, so I figured it was time to patch things up w/Adam Dunn... occasionally, writers and players have problems with each other... usually they pass... ours lingered, which was dumb, because Dunn is among the most engaging and self-effacing Reds, not to mention one of the most important. So when I asked Dunn today if we could bury the hatchet, he didn't bury it in my head. We had a great talk, he seems a changed guy. More serious about the player he can be, more aware that his vast potential was going a little untapped. More mature, generally. Good for him. Good for the Reds. I'll write about him for Sunday's paper. Meantime, it feels good to patch things up.

Get a room!

Heath
03-03-2007, 08:12 AM
I'm gonna have to stand with VP an CHiP on this one.

http://www.heidy.it/anni70/story/chips/images/Chips_02.jpg

Is this pedro, CHiP, & RFS62? Maybe McClain could add this to his "how to identify RedsZoners in Public".

creek14
03-03-2007, 08:22 AM
Old Fart
You talkin about me? :mooner: :p: ;)

GAC
03-03-2007, 08:29 AM
Debate is a good thing. It can be very educational if we enter with an open miind,,,, With little to no effort or reseach put into their jobs it is often difficult to tell the difference between thier work and the post from Reds.com fan forum. ;)

Exactly. What I love about the game of baseball is that it appeals to a very broad spectrum of fans. I have several co-workers who are die-hard baseball fans and are itchin' for the season to begin.

Now some would inquire as what do they mean by a "diehard" fan? I can tell you right now that none of them are "stat guys". Believe me I know because I hear from them some of the very arguments and statements, whether it's about Dunn, Jr, batting average, strikeouts, who or whatever all the time. I consider myself someone who is in the "middle" (a moderate).

People (fans) love (and follow) the game for the various reasons that bring them the most enjoyment. That is what it's all about. It's all about entertainment. When someone tells me how much they loved a Sean Casey and/or a Rich Aurilia, or whoever, I don't feel it's my "job" or responsibility to sit them down and try to "educate" them as to why they may be misguided in their thinking, and should possibly rethink their position because their OPS, VORP, and other various stats dictate it.

Now on here I find it somewhat fun, and educational, to do so. But this forum "appeals", for the most part, to those fans that approach the game from a more analytical point of view. That does interest me. But to alot of other fans I know, who again, enjoy the game as much as I do, they could care less. Are they wrong?

westofyou
03-03-2007, 10:08 AM
Once again the idea that fans can't form their own opinions without being told to think by someone in the press is floated.

I really wish I knew where I could meet these weak-willed people who can't decide what to eat for breakfast without being told what to think by someone in the press.

Maybe I could convince them to give me all their money.

Funny how Cincinnati has had this sort of press for over 50 years now, combative, setting up a you vs them mentality.

And yet you haven't noticed it at all?

Maybe you need to see how some of the other cites do it to get a better picture?

http://www.deadballart.com/redszone/luke.gif

Falls City Beer
03-03-2007, 10:11 AM
http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/blogphotos/daugherty_160x379.jpg

What the hell happened to his neck?

westofyou
03-03-2007, 10:17 AM
What the hell happened to his neck?

I had a cat once whose neck was like that because he got caught in the engine of a car briefly (lost 1/4 of his tail too) He was ok except for the tail and bent neck... maybe Paul likes the warmth of hot engine after a night of catting around?

OnBaseMachine
03-03-2007, 10:19 AM
Paul wears sweaters, enough said.

creek14
03-03-2007, 10:23 AM
Once again the idea that fans can't form their own opinions without being told to think by someone in the press is floated.

I really wish I knew where I could meet these weak-willed people who can't decide what to eat for breakfast without being told what to think by someone in the press.

Maybe I could convince them to give me all their money.
Come on over to my work. There are a couple guys here who start every Reds conversation with "Marty said..."

Ltlabner
03-03-2007, 10:26 AM
Funny how Cincinnati has had this sort of press for over 50 years now, combative, setting up a you vs them mentality.

Maybe you need to see how some of the other cites do it to get a better picture?

Yea, there are no other fans in any other city on the planet that are too focused on strike outs.

There are no other fans on the planet who expect too much of their 'overpaid' star players.

Not a single casual fan anywhere outside the Cincy metro area that just believes and repeats the superficial 'truths' of baseball.

It's only in Cincy.

westofyou
03-03-2007, 10:29 AM
Yea, there are no other fans in any other city on the planet that are too focused on strike outs.

There are no other fans on the planet who expect too much of their 'overpaid' star players.

Not a single casual fan anywhere outside the Cincy metro area that just believes and repeats the superficial 'truths' of baseball.

It's only in Cincy.
Yes, and the press and media have never added fuel to any fire... BTW William Randolph Hearst says hello.

Ltlabner
03-03-2007, 10:37 AM
Yes, and the press and media have never added fuel to any fire... BTW William Randolph Hearst says hello.

Of course the press adds fule to the fire. Some people will parrot the evil Marty and now Paul. Casual fans who really don't follow the game other than the occasional trip to GABP, often on free tickets, are going to do that. People who really don't know about the game are going to want to chip into conversations around the watercooler with something.

But the idea that Marty planted the idea that K's are bad, the star player will never measure up and hustle = good in the general mindset of the casual fans is poppycock. Reinforicing it yes. Creating it no. To believe that tripe you have to believe that nobody complained about K's or the star player before Marty came to town.

westofyou
03-03-2007, 10:39 AM
Reinforicing it yes. Creating it no.

What's the difference?

Both are wrong


“Trying to determine what is going on in the world by reading newspapers is like trying to tell the time by watching the second hand of a clock.”

Ben Hecht



“Far more thought and care go into the composition of any prominent ad in a newspaper or magazine than go into the writing of their features and editorials”

Marshall McLuhan

Yachtzee
03-03-2007, 11:33 AM
I guess some people feel that journalists should at least attempt to present the news in a fair and unbiased manner, where as others don't feel that getting the news through an unbiased filter is important. The fact that Daugherty felt the need to let us know that he and Dunn have "buried the hatchet" indicates to me that Daugherty lets his personal biases affect the way he writes his column. To me that throws his entire credibility in doubt.

I don't expect journalists to be able to be completely unbiased. However, I think good journalists recognize their own biases and try to present an objective view in spite of those biases. Bad ones don't really care about that and would rather write about their relationships with their subjects under the mistaken belief that people read the articles for the author, not the subject.

WMR
03-03-2007, 11:39 AM
good journalists

There's the rub with Daugherty. :laugh:

Falls City Beer
03-03-2007, 11:42 AM
What's the difference?

Both are wrong

That's a great quote by Hecht.

MWM
03-03-2007, 11:50 AM
Yeah, people are never influenced at all by what is said in the media. I guess all the billions and billions of dollars spent on advertising in this country is a waste of time. And all the sports talk shows are a waste as well because people think for themselves and don't allow what these media personalities say to influence their opinions. Yes, this country, and especially Cincinnati, is full of free thinkers.

NJReds
03-03-2007, 11:50 AM
I guess some people feel that journalists should at least attempt to present the news in a fair and unbiased manner, where as others don't feel that getting the news through an unbiased filter is important. The fact that Daugherty felt the need to let us know that he and Dunn have "buried the hatchet" indicates to me that Daugherty lets his personal biases affect the way he writes his column. To me that throws his entire credibility in doubt.

I don't expect journalists to be able to be completely unbiased. However, I think good journalists recognize their own biases and try to present an objective view in spite of those biases. Bad ones don't really care about that and would rather write about their relationships with their subjects under the mistaken belief that people read the articles for the author, not the subject.

Reporters are supposed to be unbiased. Columnists are paid to give their opinion based on observation. Big difference. Sports columnists are always ticking off athletes. Now that sports columnists have blogs, they can enlighten us on the status of their business relationships. A big non-story if you ask me.

Sweetstop
03-03-2007, 11:52 AM
I guess some people feel that journalists should at least attempt to present the news in a fair and unbiased manner, where as others don't feel that getting the news through an unbiased filter is important. The fact that Daugherty felt the need to let us know that he and Dunn have "buried the hatchet" indicates to me that Daugherty lets his personal biases affect the way he writes his column. To me that throws his entire credibility in doubt.

I don't expect journalists to be able to be completely unbiased. However, I think good journalists recognize their own biases and try to present an objective view in spite of those biases. Bad ones don't really care about that and would rather write about their relationships with their subjects under the mistaken belief that people read the articles for the author, not the subject.

I'm sure you know he's a columnist, not a reporter. He's supposed to be giving his opinion.

Yachtzee
03-03-2007, 12:12 PM
I'm sure you know he's a columnist, not a reporter. He's supposed to be giving his opinion.

Yes, I'm aware of that. I still feel that as a columnist, his opinions should be based on fact. He may have his own philosophy as far as how those facts should be interpreted, and I might not agree with it. That's fine. But this whole "look at me, I'm buddy, buddy with Adam now" stuff is more about his own personal relationship with Dunn and has nothing to do with baseball or sports in general. He's not even giving us an opinion, he's just telling us that he and Adam sat down, had a nice talk, decided to be friends again, and might have had a quick snuggle on the couch afterward while watching a "Friends" rerun.

As a professional sports columnist, I don't think it should matter whether he's on good terms with Adam or not. It shouldn't figure into his writing either way. The fact that he feels the need to tell us about it makes it seem like he thinks it's important for us to know and makes me think that his opinions are based on personal relationships and not his observation of what goes on down at the ballpark.

NJReds
03-03-2007, 12:25 PM
Yes, I'm aware of that. I still feel that as a columnist, his opinions should be based on fact. He may have his own philosophy as far as how those facts should be interpreted, and I might not agree with it. That's fine. But this whole "look at me, I'm buddy, buddy with Adam now" stuff is more about his own personal relationship with Dunn and has nothing to do with baseball or sports in general. He's not even giving us an opinion, he's just telling us that he and Adam sat down, had a nice talk, decided to be friends again, and might have had a quick snuggle on the couch afterward while watching a "Friends" rerun.

As a professional sports columnist, I don't think it should matter whether he's on good terms with Adam or not. It shouldn't figure into his writing either way. The fact that he feels the need to tell us about it makes it seem like he thinks it's important for us to know and makes me think that his opinions are based on personal relationships and not his observation of what goes on down at the ballpark.

I agree with everything you said. And I don't think they should have blogs, either.

paintmered
03-03-2007, 12:42 PM
Come on over to my work. There are a couple guys here who start every Reds conversation with "Marty said..."

Oh I know. I've tried to fight the battle there too. One of them even tried to discount what I was saying just because he coached his son's little league team.

People read and hear what is said and take it as absolute truth.

vaticanplum
03-03-2007, 12:47 PM
What the hell happened to his neck?


I had a cat once whose neck was like that because he got caught in the engine of a car briefly...

:bowrofl:

MaineRed
03-03-2007, 12:54 PM
Anyone think this guy believes Dunn is due for a big year and he wants to jump on the bandwagon early?

The friends again, Adam is more serious now combo rubs me the wrong way.

If you had to ask Adam Dunn to bury the hatchet and there was a hatchet to be buried, despite saying yes, he still doesn't like you.

Chip R
03-03-2007, 12:57 PM
I agree with everything you said. And I don't think they should have blogs, either.


I don't know if I'd go that far. Marc and Trent have done updates in their blogs on ST games that weren't available over TV or radio. They can provide good information as well. People coming down to Sarasota might look at their blogs and find good places to eat or do something.

The main problem here isn't the relative ignorance the media shows - or doesn't show. It's the media interjecting themselves into the story. I realize columnists like Doc have the leeway to do that. They write about their experiences with family, friends and people they run into. Sometimes they even collect enough material to write a book. But the danger is that these writers - and other media types as well - get so much attention that they begin to believe that they are the story and the subject they are covering is incidental.

Sweetstop
03-03-2007, 01:10 PM
I agree with everything you said. And I don't think they should have blogs, either.


Wow. Like everyone else, they have a right to write them, and you have a right not to read them.


IMO, more facts, personal or not, are usually a good thing to have on file in the mind....generally helps lead one to the truth of the matter.:)

Natty Redlocks
03-03-2007, 01:25 PM
Wow. Like everyone else, they have a right to write them, and you have a right not to read them.


IMO, more facts, personal or not, are usually a good thing to have on file in the mind....generally helps lead one to the truth of the matter.:)

Agreed. I think it's awesome that we have access to so much more stuff now, rather than just being spoonfed the bits that will sell papers.

Ltlabner
03-03-2007, 02:09 PM
I guess some people feel that journalists should at least attempt to present the news in a fair and unbiased manner, where as others don't feel that getting the news through an unbiased filter is important.

It's nieve to think that a reporters bias is not going to creap into their stories/reports. We all have baises, prejudices, pre-conceved notions, etc. Some may do a better job than others of keeping them in check, but unless you just read the box score breakdown of who did what you will be subject to a reporters bias.



Yeah, people are never influenced at all by what is said in the media. I guess all the billions and billions of dollars spent on advertising in this country is a waste of time. And all the sports talk shows are a waste as well because people think for themselves and don't allow what these media personalities say to influence their opinions. Yes, this country, and especially Cincinnati, is full of free thinkers.

Of course people are influnced by Marty. Casual fans, who typically are just looking for something to say around the watercooler are going to use his thoughts as ammo so they have a sense of fitting in. That's why most comments/breif conversations typically revolve around a limited number of subjects: strike outs, Dunn's overpaid, when will Jr get hurt and Milton sucks.

But they also can gleam these nuggets off of ESPN, local sports TV, local newspaper reporting, CNN sports highlights, etc. They can also harken back to their days on the youth baseball field. They can also draw upon their own personal envy (typically resulting in the ___________ is overpaid comments). But somehow Marty is the only source on the entire planet for people to get ideas in their head that RZ frowns on? Please.

dsmith421
03-03-2007, 07:13 PM
That blog entry is just pathetic.

"OMG I talked to Adam in the hall and he was all 'let's be BFF' and I was all 'I thought you like totally hated me' and he was like 'no way'!!!!"

Falls City Beer
03-03-2007, 07:21 PM
That blog entry is just pathetic.

"OMG I talked to Adam in the hall and he was all 'let's be BFF' and I was all 'I thought you like totally hated me' and he was like 'no way'!!!!"

"And I was like 'whatevs'. BRB!!!"

Cedric
03-03-2007, 07:28 PM
Just a idiotic blog entry. Is that really something anyone should care about?

If it's not a personal blog than that entry was just worthless.

texasdave
03-03-2007, 07:47 PM
Reporters are supposed to be unbiased. Columnists are paid to give their opinion based on observation. Big difference. Sports columnists are always ticking off athletes. Now that sports columnists have blogs, they can enlighten us on the status of their business relationships. A big non-story if you ask me.

Exactly. Paul Daugherty is not a journalist; he's a columnist. He is paid to be opinionated. The more opinionated the better. He has done his job if he has moved the reader viscerally. You shouldn't finish his column and simply nod and say, "yep, those stats sound about right.

NJReds
03-03-2007, 07:54 PM
I don't know if I'd go that far. Marc and Trent have done updates in their blogs on ST games that weren't available over TV or radio. They can provide good information as well. People coming down to Sarasota might look at their blogs and find good places to eat or do something.


Blogs are great for beat reporters, because they often have a lot of info that doesn't make the papers. Columnists are a different case altogether. Their storytellers and are paid to express opinions. I don't know that they need blogs. The other problem is that if they don't know how to effectively use a blog, they post something inane like Daugherty did about Dunn.

pedro
03-03-2007, 08:05 PM
I like the idea of blogs for sportswriters.

as long as they don't act like they're in middle school.

Falls City Beer
03-03-2007, 08:20 PM
Columns and opinions are one thing. I think we're missing the point here: what we as readers REALLY don't care about is the life of Paul Daugherty. A good columnist knows that while his opinions might mean something, he himself doesn't. Otherwise, he's Doctor Phil, or some other self-aggrandizing goof who turns the camera toward himself, not his "subject."

GAC
03-04-2007, 05:50 AM
Paul Daugherty is no Andy Rooney. :mooner:

RFS62
03-04-2007, 08:42 AM
Aside from the argument about Doc, there seems to be a growing pile of circumstantial and anecdotal evidence that Adam Dunn might just be making some changes.

I don't give a crap about Doc's ego in the piece. I want to know if there's any truth to his conclusions about Dunn.

He's in better shape, married, a father, and now this talk about rededication and a little growing up.

Who cares about Doc's relationship with the Big Donkey? I just want to hear everything I can from every available credible source. I'll apply grains of salt accordingly.

Sweetstop
03-04-2007, 09:35 AM
Aside from the argument about Doc, there seems to be a growing pile of circumstantial and anecdotal evidence that Adam Dunn might just be making some changes.

I don't give a crap about Doc's ego in the piece. I want to know if there's any truth to his conclusions about Dunn.

He's in better shape, married, a father, and now this talk about rededication and a little growing up.

Who cares about Doc's relationship with the Big Donkey? I just want to hear everything I can from every available credible source. I'll apply grains of salt accordingly.

Thank you very much.:thumbup:

OnBaseMachine
03-04-2007, 11:01 AM
Ain't love grand: Dunn, Doc together again

SARASOTA, Fla. - Before we discuss why Adam Dunn cut back on bass fishing to become a better baseball player, let's take a moment to touch on relationships, maturity, brotherly love and peace on earth.

Dunn and I didn't speak last season. The whole season. It's pretty hard for Dunn to blow off anyone for a week, let alone a year. He's a long, tall, laid-back Texan, engaging and appealing, who has fun even when he isn't having fun. It takes a special talent to antagonize him into a six-month silence.

I had the talent. I had the skeelz. In about June, I asked Dunn in the home clubhouse if he had a minute. "Nope," he said.

Is it because you don't have a minute, or is it because it's me who's asking? "Both," Dunn replied. "Nobody in here likes you. Why is that?"

"Beats me, Adam. Why is that?" I said.

"Because you're (a well-known orifice)," Dunn said.

"Does that mean you won't talk to me?" I asked.

And so it went. So it was with more than a little what-the-heck that I approached Dunn Friday. I figured it was a new year and, it being spring and all, maybe love was in the air. Besides, I needed a column.

"Can we bury the hatchet?" I asked Dunn. I was hopeful, but not optimistic, that he wouldn't bury it in my skull. Did I mention things were rocky? If we were married, we'd have been on Dr. Phil.

An hour later, in the soft and tender sunshine of a Florida morn made for hearts in love, Dunner and I had turned the page. I'm sorry I called you Adam Dumb, I said. I'm sorry I said no one likes you, he said.

OK, so those weren't spoken thoughts. They didn't have to be. Between good friends, it's all been said. Now then ...

The point is not that Adam Dunn intends to be a "great" outfielder. He is a very good athlete, but lots of being a great outfielder is instinctual. He can be better. Probably, he'll never be great. The point is, Dunn cares enough to want to be great. All that means is everything.

You can talk all you want about fifth starters, Homer Bailey, who closes games and who should play center field. There is no more important piece of the Reds pie now than Adam Dunn. Forget the defense. If Dunn can retain his long-ball stroke while cutting back on his strikeouts ... if he can remember how to shorten his swing when he's behind in the count ... if he can bat .275 and not .235 ... if he can hit gaps and occasionally hit a pitch the other way ...

The man will hit 40 homers, drive in 125 runs, and the fears about the Reds' lack of punch will fade. Without Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez, Dunn's bat is that important.

"Everything has always come to me," Dunn said. "(Defense) didn't. Now I realize I have to work for it to get better. Maturity."

A few things have happened to make Dunn grow up. He finally tired of "the pounding" he took from media and fans for his defense and for his perceived nonchalance toward the game. He got married in December. He had an abysmal August and September. And at age 27, Dunn decided he'd finally tap into his considerable potential.

"I should have done this a long time ago," Dunn said. "There's no other way for me to go about it now. From now until I retire. I just know I'm capable of more. That's what's been so frustrating."

"For you and everyone else," I said.

"I agree with you 100 percent," Dunn said.

"Whoa, lemme make sure the tape's running. You agree with me 100 percent?" I said.

"That'll be the last time, probably," said Dunn.

I said I figured he knew he could make $10 million a year just by hitting home runs. He said: "I don't want to do that. That's not what I want to be known for. I know I'm better."

I said the "embarrassment" of last August and September pushed him now. He said: "Embarrassment is a strong word. I was disappointed. It's like, you can take your mom yelling and screaming at you. But when she says she's disappointed in you ..."

I said the advice he got as a 22-year-old - pull the ball, don't walk so much - had infected his game ever since. He agreed. He praised Reds coaches Billy Hatcher and Brook Jacoby as being "the first two guys in those jobs who I completely trust." Hatcher is teaching him better defense. Jacoby is helping him with his hitting.

I asked him how much fishing he'd done in the offseason. Dunn is an obsessive bass man. In the past, it had been a metaphor for his what-the-hang attitude.

He said he hardly fished at all. That's when I knew he was serious.

"I didn't do a lot of things I like to do. I didn't have a lot of time," he said.

I asked him what he expected from himself this year. "To put together a complete season for the first time in my career. Numbers-wise, I have no idea. I look back on the years and say, 'This was a good year, but it could have been a great year.' I want to have a great year," Dunn said.

Regardless, I'm there for him. There's no turning back for Dunner and me. We're meant for each other.

I wished him the best. I actually meant it.

E-mail pdaugherty@enquirer.com

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070304/COL03/703040378/1071

westofyou
03-04-2007, 11:06 AM
I wished him the best. I actually meant it.

Gee... swell, golly...

I guess this is just "another" blog entry so we shouldn't care... but wait...it's not it's in the paper, sitting on someones steps in Batavia right now.

Can we care yet that Paul is using his fight with Dunn to generate a column?

I think personally, it's weak.... but hey.... that's me.

OnBaseMachine
03-04-2007, 11:14 AM
Gee... swell, golly...

I guess this is just "another" blog entry so we shouldn't care... but wait...it's not it's in the paper, sitting on someones steps in Batavia right now.

Can we care yet that Paul is using his fight with Dunn to generate a column?

I think personally, it's weak.... but hey.... that's me.

That's what I thought too, woy.

I did like reading some of Dunn's quotes though. He sounds like he is primed to have a huge season...

RFS62
03-04-2007, 11:15 AM
Yeah, he definitely buried the lead.

Except he thinks it's him.

Still, I like what I'm hearing after you wade through all the self-aggrandizement from Daugherty.

The story is Dunn.

dsmith421
03-04-2007, 11:21 AM
I think Dunn pretty much nailed it: Daugherty is a well-known orifice, and, in my opinion, kind of a hack.

WMR
03-04-2007, 12:07 PM
The point is not that Adam Dunn intends to be a "great" outfielder. He is a very good athlete, but lots of being a great outfielder is instinctual. He can be better. Probably, he'll never be great.

WTF???

Yachtzee
03-04-2007, 12:11 PM
He could have written a good column about Dunn's change in his approach without getting into the personal details. Unfortunately, he made the personal details the leading part of the column. The more I think about it, I don't think I have so much of a problem with columnists having personal relationships with people in the industry they cover. Some columnists are great at getting scoops on rumored trades or signings through their use of personal contacts. But that doesn't mean they should make their personal relationships the story.

I think the worst columnist in this regard is Peter King. I used to read his Monday Morning QB column religiously to get insight into the goings-on over the past week in football. Sure he had some non-football stuff in it. Sometimes I read it and sometimes I skipped it. But over the past few seasons his personal stuff has really taken over the column to a degree where sometimes he barely writes about football at all. If I finish a football column knowing more about your travel frustrations, your coffee drinking habits, and your daughter's field hockey team than I do about what happened that week in football, then it's not much of a football column, is it? As such, I don't read Peter King's column anymore.

vaticanplum
03-04-2007, 01:16 PM
Ain't love grand: Dunn, Doc together again

SARASOTA, Fla. - Before we discuss why Adam Dunn cut back on bass fishing to become a better baseball player, let's take a moment to touch on relationships, maturity, brotherly love and peace on earth.

Dunn and I didn't speak last season. The whole season. It's pretty hard for Dunn to blow off anyone for a week, let alone a year. He's a long, tall, laid-back Texan, engaging and appealing, who has fun even when he isn't having fun. It takes a special talent to antagonize him into a six-month silence.

I had the talent. I had the skeelz. In about June, I asked Dunn in the home clubhouse if he had a minute. "Nope," he said.

Is it because you don't have a minute, or is it because it's me who's asking? "Both," Dunn replied. "Nobody in here likes you. Why is that?"

"Beats me, Adam. Why is that?" I said.

"Because you're (a well-known orifice)," Dunn said.

"Does that mean you won't talk to me?" I asked.

And so it went. So it was with more than a little what-the-heck that I approached Dunn Friday. I figured it was a new year and, it being spring and all, maybe love was in the air. Besides, I needed a column.

"Can we bury the hatchet?" I asked Dunn. I was hopeful, but not optimistic, that he wouldn't bury it in my skull. Did I mention things were rocky? If we were married, we'd have been on Dr. Phil.

An hour later, in the soft and tender sunshine of a Florida morn made for hearts in love, Dunner and I had turned the page. I'm sorry I called you Adam Dumb, I said. I'm sorry I said no one likes you, he said.

OK, so those weren't spoken thoughts. They didn't have to be. Between good friends, it's all been said. Now then ...

The point is not that Adam Dunn intends to be a "great" outfielder. He is a very good athlete, but lots of being a great outfielder is instinctual. He can be better. Probably, he'll never be great. The point is, Dunn cares enough to want to be great. All that means is everything.

You can talk all you want about fifth starters, Homer Bailey, who closes games and who should play center field. There is no more important piece of the Reds pie now than Adam Dunn. Forget the defense. If Dunn can retain his long-ball stroke while cutting back on his strikeouts ... if he can remember how to shorten his swing when he's behind in the count ... if he can bat .275 and not .235 ... if he can hit gaps and occasionally hit a pitch the other way ...

The man will hit 40 homers, drive in 125 runs, and the fears about the Reds' lack of punch will fade. Without Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez, Dunn's bat is that important.

"Everything has always come to me," Dunn said. "(Defense) didn't. Now I realize I have to work for it to get better. Maturity."

A few things have happened to make Dunn grow up. He finally tired of "the pounding" he took from media and fans for his defense and for his perceived nonchalance toward the game. He got married in December. He had an abysmal August and September. And at age 27, Dunn decided he'd finally tap into his considerable potential.

"I should have done this a long time ago," Dunn said. "There's no other way for me to go about it now. From now until I retire. I just know I'm capable of more. That's what's been so frustrating."

"For you and everyone else," I said.

"I agree with you 100 percent," Dunn said.

"Whoa, lemme make sure the tape's running. You agree with me 100 percent?" I said.

"That'll be the last time, probably," said Dunn.

I said I figured he knew he could make $10 million a year just by hitting home runs. He said: "I don't want to do that. That's not what I want to be known for. I know I'm better."

I said the "embarrassment" of last August and September pushed him now. He said: "Embarrassment is a strong word. I was disappointed. It's like, you can take your mom yelling and screaming at you. But when she says she's disappointed in you ..."

I said the advice he got as a 22-year-old - pull the ball, don't walk so much - had infected his game ever since. He agreed. He praised Reds coaches Billy Hatcher and Brook Jacoby as being "the first two guys in those jobs who I completely trust." Hatcher is teaching him better defense. Jacoby is helping him with his hitting.

I asked him how much fishing he'd done in the offseason. Dunn is an obsessive bass man. In the past, it had been a metaphor for his what-the-hang attitude.

He said he hardly fished at all. That's when I knew he was serious.

"I didn't do a lot of things I like to do. I didn't have a lot of time," he said.

I asked him what he expected from himself this year. "To put together a complete season for the first time in my career. Numbers-wise, I have no idea. I look back on the years and say, 'This was a good year, but it could have been a great year.' I want to have a great year," Dunn said.

Regardless, I'm there for him. There's no turning back for Dunner and me. We're meant for each other.

I wished him the best. I actually meant it.

E-mail pdaugherty@enquirer.com

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070304/COL03/703040378/1071

I seriously thought this was a parody. I was about to give you mad rep points, OBM.

Yachtzee hit the nail on the head earlier in saying that the fact that Daugherty feels the need to write these things says that he allows his personal feelings of players to influence his writing (Yachtzee said it better). And FCB raises a good point about opinion. We need a serious redefinition of the word "opinion" on this board. Saying that you think Adam Dunn is a bad baseball player is an opinion -- an ignorant one, perhaps, but an opinion. Talking about your relationship with Adam Dunn is a personal anecdote. For a columnist, a personal anecdote here and there is fine IF it backs up a point you're making. But a lot of columnists have really veered into the category of making everything they write a personal opinion. I blame the Sports Guy, what's his name, Bill Simmons. Simmons does (or used to do) what he does very well. The problem is that what he does should not be a standard for every kind of sports journalism.

I'm not in the camp that believes that what Daugherty says unduly influences the fans' opinions. I believe that about Marty, but I just don't think Daugherty has that much clout. My problem isn't that I think his style of writing harms the Reds' fanbase; my problem is that I don't think he's doing his job well. And he used to. But his writing has developed severe tendencies toward the personal, the sentimental, the manipulative, and in the end this means he's simply writing the same column over and over with a different cast of characters all the time (himself being the only constant). Any literate person can sit down and do this. I considered pursuing sports journalism, and the reason I didn't (besides the fact that I can't handle the short, choppy sentences and paragraphs) is because I'm not the best at collecting facts and presenting them in the context of something interesting. I can tell a story, but that's not journalism. Honestly, if I had been in college five years later, my mind might have been changed. Facts -- even facts backing up opinion -- are no longer always necessary. There is no melding of box scores and anecdotes in most local papers; it's one or the other. And like I said, I just don't like it. Melding those two is a difficult thing to do, so I think a journalist avoiding it is just lazy.

kaldaniels
03-04-2007, 04:15 PM
Frankly, I enjoy this type of story, every now and then , I mean it is the beginning of spring training, not the last days of a pennant run. Why not put in a story with a personal touch on it? For anyone complaining along the lines of journalistic integrity/standards, welcome the the year 2007. That's just how it is now. Read the AP recap if you don't want any human element in it. I enjoyed the piece.

redsmetz
03-04-2007, 05:41 PM
I seriously thought this was a parody. I was about to give you mad rep points, OBM.

Yachtzee hit the nail on the head earlier in saying that the fact that Daugherty feels the need to write these things says that he allows his personal feelings of players to influence his writing (Yachtzee said it better). And FCB raises a good point about opinion. We need a serious redefinition of the word "opinion" on this board. Saying that you think Adam Dunn is a bad baseball player is an opinion -- an ignorant one, perhaps, but an opinion. Talking about your relationship with Adam Dunn is a personal anecdote. For a columnist, a personal anecdote here and there is fine IF it backs up a point you're making. But a lot of columnists have really veered into the category of making everything they write a personal opinion. I blame the Sports Guy, what's his name, Bill Simmons. Simmons does (or used to do) what he does very well. The problem is that what he does should not be a standard for every kind of sports journalism.

I'm not in the camp that believes that what Daugherty says unduly influences the fans' opinions. I believe that about Marty, but I just don't think Daugherty has that much clout. My problem isn't that I think his style of writing harms the Reds' fanbase; my problem is that I don't think he's doing his job well. And he used to. But his writing has developed severe tendencies toward the personal, the sentimental, the manipulative, and in the end this means he's simply writing the same column over and over with a different cast of characters all the time (himself being the only constant). Any literate person can sit down and do this. I considered pursuing sports journalism, and the reason I didn't (besides the fact that I can't handle the short, choppy sentences and paragraphs) is because I'm not the best at collecting facts and presenting them in the context of something interesting. I can tell a story, but that's not journalism. Honestly, if I had been in college five years later, my mind might have been changed. Facts -- even facts backing up opinion -- are no longer always necessary. There is no melding of box scores and anecdotes in most local papers; it's one or the other. And like I said, I just don't like it. Melding those two is a difficult thing to do, so I think a journalist avoiding it is just lazy.

I think one needs to remember the vast difference between how a reporter writes and how a columnist writes. Reporters are expected to give the "who, what, where, when" of a story and columnists are free to write their own opinions. That's the nature of the beast.

Now frankly, some columnists take themselves entirely too seriously or oftentimes choose to take on the curmudgeon role, etc., but as a columnist, it's their right to give their opinion.

vaticanplum
03-04-2007, 10:01 PM
Now frankly, some columnists take themselves entirely too seriously or oftentimes choose to take on the curmudgeon role, etc., but as a columnist, it's their right to give their opinion.

And again, there's a major difference between opinion and anecdote. I see all of zero baseball-related opinions put forth by Daugherty in this particular article. He's a columnist, yes, but a sports columnist, not a human relations columnist.

My personal desire regarding sports columns is to read an informed opinion from an insider's perspective, with a personal spin here and there. There's a reason I don't watch Dr. Phil.