Wednesday, January 14, 2004
LOCKE MISSTEP
I have to admit, I've referenced a ton of David Locke stuff on this page on this site, but the one part today about the Mariners having not acquired a player via trade or development for the last 10 years (sans Winn) slipped by me. I trusted David Locke a little too much.
And the thing is, I knew two nights ago while listening to a Locke shift on KJR that he hadn't come up with an idea for a column yet, and I think he had one due for the next day but must not have met the deadline or something (between all his Sonic pre-, postgame, and halftime spots). It's almost ironic that David Locke the stat geek slipped up on one of the more obvious things (non-statistical) in the article which, as stated by Derek, shouldn't have to require two assumptions to make the article go off without a hitch.
Kudos to Derek and Steve for nailing this. The blogosphere as a whole has managed to nail the normal beat writers for painting too-rosy pictures of the Mariners trials and travails, whereas this time a writer (Locke) has been nailed for going too far the other way. Good to see the blogosphere maintain a little level-headedness here.
As for me, I guess I must have been tired or something, letting the Locke gaffe slip by me. As I've said, I've used a ton of Locke references and stats on this page and I've come to trust David Locke, but I guess there's a reason why his day job is as an evening sports talk show host and not as a daily P-I writer (~once/twice a week). That said, David Locke's show (7-10p) is horribly entertaining. He's a total ass to callers who stumble or bring in faulty logic or interrupt him. His forte is basketball, no doubt about it.
I'll just be a little more careful next time. I'm crafting my watchful eye.
And the thing is, I knew two nights ago while listening to a Locke shift on KJR that he hadn't come up with an idea for a column yet, and I think he had one due for the next day but must not have met the deadline or something (between all his Sonic pre-, postgame, and halftime spots). It's almost ironic that David Locke the stat geek slipped up on one of the more obvious things (non-statistical) in the article which, as stated by Derek, shouldn't have to require two assumptions to make the article go off without a hitch.
Kudos to Derek and Steve for nailing this. The blogosphere as a whole has managed to nail the normal beat writers for painting too-rosy pictures of the Mariners trials and travails, whereas this time a writer (Locke) has been nailed for going too far the other way. Good to see the blogosphere maintain a little level-headedness here.
As for me, I guess I must have been tired or something, letting the Locke gaffe slip by me. As I've said, I've used a ton of Locke references and stats on this page and I've come to trust David Locke, but I guess there's a reason why his day job is as an evening sports talk show host and not as a daily P-I writer (~once/twice a week). That said, David Locke's show (7-10p) is horribly entertaining. He's a total ass to callers who stumble or bring in faulty logic or interrupt him. His forte is basketball, no doubt about it.
I'll just be a little more careful next time. I'm crafting my watchful eye.
/ Click for main page
