Master Index of Archived Threads


Hey, Ken Davidoff

Edgy DC Feb 19 2009 07:14 AM

The Mets don't have a "complex," writers like you do. And you don't understand the dynamics of <i>The Brady Bunch</i>. And that's just sad.

metirish Feb 19 2009 07:21 AM

Need something more than that Edgy.

Edgy DC Feb 19 2009 07:24 AM

Read Ken Davidoff. http://blogs.trb.com/sports/baseball/bl ... x_der.html Most rehashed theme of the last fifteen years. Slow day? I'll rile 'em up with the old Jan Brady column. He's citing Wally Matthews. I repeat. He's citing Wally Matthews.

Edgy DC Feb 19 2009 07:31 AM

By the way, in fairness, that's half a good column Wallace Matthews wrote. Davidoff, of course, should write his own damn column and do his own damn work on the subject.

metirish Feb 19 2009 07:43 AM

Davidoff is trending down towards Harper with that crap , the Mets failed to sign Mannny ....is not being interested failure? I had forgotten that the MFY's signed CC the day after the Mets signed Rodriguez , I guess I wasn't all that beat up over it....

batmagadanleadoff Feb 19 2009 08:50 AM

It's true that the Mets are getting their asses kicked everywhere, coverage-wise: even in The New Yorker magazine:

metsguyinmichigan Feb 19 2009 09:48 AM

"Now, the Yankees have reloaded, and the Mets' offseason bullpen acquisitions have been overshadowed by their failure to sign Manny Ramirez, the Citigroup fiasco and the Bernie Madoff fiasco." How can it be a "failure" if they had no interest in the $20 million a year headcase. That's like saying I failed to have lobster tails for lunch today, even though I packed a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich and was happily eating it.

Edgy DC Feb 19 2009 09:56 AM

The Yankees and 28 other teams have failed to sign Manny Ramirez. In fact, I failed to sign him as well. So did Davidoff.

G-Fafif Feb 19 2009 12:18 PM

](And this of course matters, by the way. Yes, many, many fans are loyal to one team. But plenty of casual fans will choose to go to just one or two games a season, and the clubs' relative performances will help determine those fans' choices. The Mets and Yankees are battling over turf.) The Mets had their heartbreaking end in 2006 and set a new attendance record in 2007. The Mets had their collapse in 2007 and set a new attendance record in 2008. Even taking into account the Shea Goodbye factor last year, that's a lot of ground that was made up despite not generating enough buzz for Davidoff's tastes. Did Ken wake up and suddenly realize he had nothing to say and a hole in which he is paid to say it?

G-Fafif Feb 19 2009 12:23 PM

] In the last 20 years, there have been just 12 days in which the Mets were playing baseball and the Yankees weren't. All 12 occurred in 2006. And what happened? The Mets concluded that run with one of their all-time heartbreakers. And WTF does this mean? Is that a metaphor? 'Cause I'm willing to guess that on at least one day since 1989 outside of 2006 the Mets had a game and the Yankees didn't. ]Now, the Mets certainly don't mind that their superstar third baseman is not the one dealing with a front-page-producing controversy. But they wouldn't mind a little more attention, either. Holy Tom Filer, Davidoff is more lost than any motorist on I-4. Because his editor wants to beat the A-Rod horse a little deader, it means the Mets aren't very interesting. ]It seems as though the Mets are always playing behind the Yankees when it comes to generating buzz PEDs to St. Lucie -- stat! And let's sign Carl Pavano while we're at it. "Ken Davidoff's Baseball Insider" now coming to you exclusively from inside Ken Davidoff's head.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 19 2009 12:32 PM

I think the '06 reference was to the Mets advancing further in the playoffs than the MFYs that year. Beating their asses in the season series last year seems to have been overlooked in Ken's comparison too.

Edgy DC Feb 19 2009 12:35 PM

Actual, deleted scene from the Brady Bunch episode, "Middle Sister": <blockquote>"Marcia, Marcia, Marcia! That's all anybody talks about is Marcia! "Jan, it was your choice not to, you know, bulk up a little, and I'm afraid we're going to have release you." "Are you people just attention whores?" "Now, now. The family's really high on Oliver right now and we need to make some room"</blockquote>

seawolf17 Feb 19 2009 12:38 PM

="G-Fafif"] ] In the last 20 years, there have been just 12 days in which the Mets were playing baseball and the Yankees weren't. All 12 occurred in 2006. And what happened? The Mets concluded that run with one of their all-time heartbreakers. And WTF does this mean? Is that a metaphor? 'Cause I'm willing to guess that on at least one day since 1989 outside of 2006 the Mets had a game and the Yankees didn't. Yeah, no shit. That's sloppy reporting. It took me about ten seconds to find a date that disproves his garbage; July 24, 2008, a 3-1 win over the Phillies while his beloved Yankees were sitting around their houses sticking syringes in their collective asses. Go to hell, Davidoff.

G-Fafif Feb 19 2009 12:44 PM

="John Cougar Lunchbucket":22ydzm6w]I think the '06 reference was to the Mets advancing further in the playoffs than the MFYs that year.[/quote:22ydzm6w] Ah, I get it. It's stupid, but I get it. G-Fafif Feb 19 2009 01:05 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 19 2009 01:06 PM ](And this of course matters, by the way. Yes, many, many fans are loyal to one team. But plenty of casual fans will choose to go to just one or two games a season, and the clubs' relative performances will help determine those fans' choices. The Mets and Yankees are battling over turf.) I've gotta come back to this again. What is Davidoff's evidence? Is there research to back up this assertion? Or is this just conventional wisdom that falls outside Davidoff's expertise? He covers trades and scandals and the clubhouse. Does Ken Davidoff any clue as to how the "casual fan" thinks? Or how much of a franchise's business is accounted for by this mythical creature? Is it as simple as "buzz"? Or is it about winning? Location? Somebody's kid liking the color of somebody's uniform on TV and pestering his parents to take him to that bright, shiny thing? Are the Mets or Yankees truly made or broken by easily impressionable dilettantes? Does brand building come into this? Sources say Ken Davidoff's source for this assertion is his ass. metsguyinmichigan Feb 19 2009 01:05 PM ="seawolf17"] ="G-Fafif"] ] In the last 20 years, there have been just 12 days in which the Mets were playing baseball and the Yankees weren't. All 12 occurred in 2006. And what happened? The Mets concluded that run with one of their all-time heartbreakers. And WTF does this mean? Is that a metaphor? 'Cause I'm willing to guess that on at least one day since 1989 outside of 2006 the Mets had a game and the Yankees didn't. Yeah, no shit. That's sloppy reporting. It took me about ten seconds to find a date that disproves his garbage; July 24, 2008, a 3-1 win over the Phillies while his beloved Yankees were sitting around their houses sticking syringes in their collective asses. Go to hell, Davidoff. I like the implication that if the Yankees aren't playing that day, the Mets have a chance to win a game, bask in the soft rain -- hee hee -- of sole possion of the back pages and steal away all those bandwagon-jumping fans. Because, on those off-days, the Yankee beat writers don't turn stories in. Right. This smacks of an "early spring training, I have to write something and I don't have anything to write about" column. It's function was served when it filled 18 inches of space. G-Fafif Feb 19 2009 01:12 PM MFY marketing campaign for 2009: LOOKING FOR SOMETHING TO DO? TRY THE NEW YORK YANKEES AND SEE WHAT'S GOT NEWSDAY BUZZING! Edgy DC Feb 19 2009 01:18 PM Why is not signing Manny a failing? Because Manny gives writers copy.