Originally Posted by Texans_Chick
I'd like to hear more of "this is what I'm seeing and this is what is concerning me" sort of talk. I don't trust a lot of this sort of information from the Chronicle because I don't think they have X and O guys, but more let's be provocative peeps. Even in November of last year, Justice was saying in his blog comments that Williams playing "terrible" and was doing a really good imitation of a sixth round pick
. The defense has had all sorts of bad bad problems, and Mario Williams shouldn't have been considered a part of that problem. If you can't trust the Chronicle people about something just that basic, what can you trust them about?
I agree, I think this is one of the big problems the Chron has. I don't know how other papers do it, but Justice is the perfect example of how Chron articles are really more emotive than analytical. I think listening to his show on 1560 is really telling of his shortcomings as a writer for the Chron. He is terribly knowlegable about baseball, but he has serious shortcomings when it comes to other sports. You can listen to him interview people and then simply relay it in his articles with the obligatory dramatic spin. I don't think he understands the sport, so he just takes what other people say and exagerates it. The Mario Williams thing is the perfect example; he would simply parrot what seemed to be the popular opinion at the time instead of breaking down strengths, weaknesses, and formulating some sort of unique analysis.
That's where they could really use an LZ-esque writer who has a background in the sport, connections with scouts and coaches, and a mind of his own.