Simmons on King Felix
Jeff · August 18, 2005 at 3:23 pm · Filed Under Mariners
In the new ESPN Magazine, Bill Simmons writes about our very own King Felix Hernandez. He makes the Dwight Gooden comparison and reminisces about those thrilling summers in the mid-1980s when Gooden was Doctor K. If you haven’t, check it out.
Comments
48 Responses to “Simmons on King Felix”
Simmons rules. Yeah he focuses too much on intangibles, and my mom knows more about performance analysis, but I love his style. Even when I vehemently disagree with his conclusions (or even flat know he’s wrong) I can’t help but love the way he frames his articles. Glad to see he’s already hip to the King.
Heck, they didn’t even let him throw a slider for a while.
Still don’t, Bill.
jason
My beef with Simmons is that for a long time, he took repeated shots at baseball — how horrible of a game it was, how he didn’t like it, he couldn’t be bothered to follow it, how even the Red Sox didn’t interest him, whatever he could get a coulumn out of that ran down baseball, he wrote it. It was (for obvious reasons, I think) the work of his I least enjoyed.
Then the Sox started winning. Simmons jumped right back on the bandwagon, writing columns about how these little things mattered, how it was to be a long-suffering Sox fan… except that he wasn’t. He wasn’t a fan for years, slagging baseball over and over.
It’s like if I started writing about the Sonics late last year and pretended I knew all about the players and the franchise’s issues even though I haven’t had more than a passing knowledge since ’96 or so.
And I say this even as I acknowledge that for all his flaws as a writer, I do like Simmons, and I read him and often enjoy it a lot, which is more than I can say about most general sports writers.
But the jump from “I don’t follow baseball because it sucks” to “I’m an expert on baseball and particularly the Red Sox” meant that either one of the two was a convenient fiction for purposes of column-writing, or he underwent a miraculous and unacknowledged conversion-with-divinely-implated expertise.
He actually wrote an article back in June that mentioned Felix. He drafted him in his keeper fantasy league, and talked about his ‘tremendous upside potential’.
Simmons is one of the 5 or 6 guys one ESPN who is still readable (most appear in Page2). I find myself laughing out loud at least a couple times during a Simmons article. It’s fun to read an entertaining hardcore sports fan’s perspective as a break from the tables and graphs you get elsewhere.
Who’s running tables and graphs?
D,
Your former employer
Is there an actual BP headquarters somewhere, with Dilbertesque cubicles for writers and vending machines that eat your quarters in a closet-sized breakroom?
I really like tables and graphs. I find them incredibly entertaining.
I concur with DMZ … Simmons here is just bandwagon-hopping again. I don’t get any real sense he knows anything special about Felix. The young-Gooden mythology is pure rehash.
Along those lines, I had an argument with a professional hacker a few months ago. He was an American (which does make you stand out around here), and he was a big football fan. He didn’t like baseball, though, and he said he didn’t like it because baseball fans annoyed him. He complained that baseball fans were the only ones likely to have really detailed stats memorised. While most athletes in other sports, he posited, knew all their own stats, the fans generally didn’t care about that kind of minutia, and he was annoyed by baseball fans who did.
I pointed out that baseball statistics have far more predictive value than the stats from other sports, and thus are far more relevant to the casual enjoyment of the game.
As a computer guy, he was willing to listen to detailed logical arguyments like the one I was making, and in the end he agreed that baseball stats do matter more, and that baseball fans weren’t really that annoying after all, know that he thought about it.
He was a big geek, you see (as professional hackers typically are), and was the sort of guy who would happily pay attention to stats if he thought there was a good reason to do so. I gave him a reason.
DMZ,
I always assumed that the baseball bashing articles were requested by ESPN. I also kind of thought that might have led to his brief flirtation with leaving. Of course I could have had the total wrong impression. That happens to me from time to time.
In general though, I like Simmons for his pop culture takes more than his sports takes. Kind of how I like Chuck Klosterman for his pop culture commentary and not his music reviews… which reminds me that I have to leave work soon so I can make my way to the UW Bookstore to see him.
Soooo your argument is that Bill Simmons, who writes for ESPN.com, the most popular site on the Internet, is a refreshing alternative to a tiny subscription site known to a small group of hard-core baseball statheads?
That seems odd to me.
Jim: No. They’re all over the country. The closest they have to a headquarters would be Joe’s house, where he writes the “flagship” column and watches baseball all day.
Bar tables are nice. I often plot a course to one.
I always assumed that the baseball bashing articles were requested by ESPN. I also kind of thought that might have led to his brief flirtation with leaving. Of course I could have had the total wrong impression.
I don’t buy that ESPN would ask any writer to write articles about how stupid a sport is, if for no other reason than ESPN makes a ton of money off broadcasting baseball. They may not actively censor topics but there’s no way they go out of their way to have their columnists write things that even indirectly hurt the mothership
Simmons is an interesting case. You have to remember that he is a comedy writer first. He’s not as much a sportswriter as he is a huge sport’s fan who writes comedy.
Now, I didn’t know that about his baseball digs, and as a baseball fan I certainly don’t love it. But I went through a similiar bitter break up with basketball a while back, so I can understand it. Still don’t like it.
But I do like reading Simmons.
All that aside… that article made me hopping with excitement all over again. Has it been five games? Seriously, it seems like WEEKS since he pitched? Could it be tonight? FRANKLIN?? Oh, crap.
DMZ,
As long as the article doesn’t a) offend advertisers and b) attracts readers, ESPN will want more of the same. If those articles we’re his most popular, ESPN might very well have asked him to write more like them. I’m just speculating though.
It just seemed to me that there was a difference in the topics he choose before and after his hiatus.
OT: Griffey Jr. hit a home run off of Brett Tomko this afternoon. (His 4th in 5 games.)
Iiiiiiiiiii just don’t buy that. Maybe this is my experience as a coming through, but working at large corporation, there’s a lot of overt and subtle pressure not to do stuff like that. ESPN’s editors may be okay with him writing about how much he dislikes baseball, but they’re far more likely to be nudging him towards writing about other topics they think could be as or more popular than they are to push him to go after one of their programming keystones.
My point is that his style of writing, comedic fan’s perspective ,is unique. That’s why I enjoy him. I didn’t say I didn’t enjoy analytical writing, but some reading some pieces is akin to watching paint dry.
I don’t read Neyer, Stark, Gammons, etc. anymore.
My point is that his style of writing, comedic fan’s perspective ,is unique.
What’s Jim Caple then?
I’ve read Simmons’ work since he was known as the Boston Sports Guy. His work before joining ESPN.com was great. I just wish I could read his old BSG columns again.
Now, I just hope that the Red Sox don’t win the World Series this year and the Patriots don’t win the Super Bowl again. I could live without the celebration pieces from Simmons. Yes, I’m a bitter Seattle sports fan.
DMZ, if what you’re saying in post 15 is true, and I believe so, then I’d be looking for hockey-bashing articles in that magazine, especially now that ESPN has ended its coverage of the NHL.
As for Simmons, I’m glad to see someone else in the mainstream media utter the same comparison to King Felix that I had since I first saw him pitch (which was his home debut.) Overall, his writing can be funny, but even a Mets fan like myself who dislikes the Yankees can grow tired of his constant literary smackdowns on that team.
You gotta read Simmons for what he is, a fan’s perspective not analysis.
I also think he is much better on basketball than on baseball.
Simmons did the same thing a bit with the Pats. He seems to be only a true hardcore fan of gambling and the NBA (I find it hilarious he mentions he is one of only 19 remaining fans of the NBA on the planet. As one of the other 18, I say sad but true.) Anything else in sports, he likes if it is really good or if it is from his roots. Can’t blame him for being a homer.
And after following the Red Sox (Buckner), followed by the strike and all, who can blame him for being disillusioned by baseball? It’s not like he had the ’95 M’s to get him juiced up about the sport again.
DMZ, if what you’re saying in post 15 is true, and I believe so, then I’d be looking for hockey-bashing articles in that magazine, especially now that ESPN has ended its coverage of the NHL.
That ESPN might be more reluctant to bash a sport it has an excellent relationship with and broadcasts does not imply that they will go out of their way to bash a sport they’re not on similar terms with.
After all, ESPN does claim to be the worldwide leader in sports (which I guess is true). There are hockey fans out there who watch ESPN and subscribe to ESPN the Dead Tree Format. They don’t want to particularly alienate those fans unless they think that hockey fans would all… I don’t know, become NBA fans?
And after following the Red Sox (Buckner), followed by the strike and all, who can blame him for being disillusioned by baseball? It’s not like he had the ‘95 M’s to get him juiced up about the sport again.
I don’t begrudge anyone their taste in sports. I watch bicycling on TV, and many people think that’s insanely boring.
My issue is that Simmons slagged baseball over and over for years, expressing disinterest when he could be bothered to express anything at all until suddenly, as the Sox got into competition, he was writing columns as the team’s A-#1 big-time fan and… well, I’m just repeating my first comment in #3
Not a chance. Basketball is like non-contact lacrosse.
Speaking of bicycling on TV, OLN is the new cable home for the NHL.
Thank goodness my cable company gets OLN. I guess you could say I’m one of 4 hockey fans in the entire Southeast.
Basketball is like non-contact lacrosse.
Have you seen an NBA game lately? There’s almost as much contact and cheating in the key as on an NFL line. It’s crazy.
Speaking of bicycling on TV, OLN is the new cable home for the NHL.
Are they going to play hockey outside on frozen lakes? Because I’m not seeing the connection.
Good one, Derek.
I don’t see the connection either, heh. OLN isn’t on as many cable systems as ESPN/ESPN2, so there will be some folks who won’t be able to watch the “new NHL” in 2005-2006. That’s not a great marketing move, IMO. The last thing the NHL needs is bad marketing.
I should clarify that I get OLN at my college, but not in my current hometown.
Comcast actually bought the rights to the NHL telecasts, and decided to air them on OLN, which it owns. There is not any real connection, except that it might build and expand OLN’s audience to viewers who might never turn to it And OLN’s telecasts of the tour are exceptional. I wish FOX did as well with playoff baseball as OLN does on the tour.
(I find it hilarious he mentions he is one of only 19 remaining fans of the NBA on the planet. As one of the other 18, I say sad but true.)
If Simmons is #19 and you’re #18, I’ll claim #17. And let’s hold #16 for Dave. “NBA action: It’s faaaaaantastic.”
jason
34. NBA action: it’s faantastic? Not if you follow the Hawks, Clippers, Knicks, Raptors, Blazers, and Bobcats.
Put me on the NBA fan list but can we please watch the verbal javelines being thrown at the Bobcats. By the way #35 you forgot to add the Hornets and the Sonics, yeah last year was good but twas a flash in the pan year. Go Mariners.
#35,
That is seriously your list of favorite teams? What could possibly be the connections that led to that?
One thing you have to say about Jerry Seinfeld, as a comedian who has uses sports in his schtick, he’s no Johnny-come-lately concerning baseball. Even in the 1st season of the television show he did stuff around Keith Hernandez and the Mets. And later he expanded it alot to include the satire around Steinbrenner. But he didn’t need the McGuire/Sosa HR duel of 1998 to be re-enthused the sport.
Unlike Simmons.
37. The Knicks are, sadly. But it’s been tough to watch most NBA games the last couple of years anyway.
31:
The connection to hockey is that Comcast is positioning OLN (no longer the Outdoor Life Network, but just ‘OLN’) as a ground-up sports network for anything they might like to air. Or so I’ve read and been told.
33.The Tour de France coverage will be interesting next year without Lance.
The Bill Simmons article did ring true for me when he said a guy like Felix only comes around once. I will definitely try to make it to his next home start, against the White Sox I think.
Friday, 8/26, it should be. I just bought my ticket…
Personally, I’m a Sonics fan, but not an NBA fan, if that makes any sense (and honestly, it should).
As for Simmons, yeah, he did the same thing with the Pats, alright; the one that will forever stick in my memory was the column he wrote after the Patriots crossed up all the experts to take Richard Seymour #7, thus completely ruining my afternoon — he was the Hawks’ #1 choice, but with him gone, they wound up taking Koren Robinson, which was the uppercut after the hard jab to the gut — it was a brilliant pick by NE, as anyone who knew anything about the game should have realized, but all Simmons could do was rant about what idiots the Pats were, and how they’d blown another #1 pick, and how they drafted so terribly they’d never win anything. This was, of course, 2001, and as a rookie, Richard Seymour would merely help the Pats start their run of three SB wins in four years; but somehow, I’ve never seen Simmons reflect on how wrong he was. (Interestingly, just to underscore that, on his list of blown #1 picks was Ty Law.)
No, I enjoy reading Simmons, but except on basketball — he does know a fair bit about orangeball, I’ll give him that — I have little or no respect for his opinion. He’s entertaining, but not very knowledgeable or insightful (which is where he differs from Jim Caple).
43, I don’t doubt that Simmons has never fessed up his bad call about Seymour, but I have seen him admit being wrong (particularly about draft picks) on numerous occasions. And I agree basketball is the only sport where he has the least bit of expertise. Which to tie this post together, I’d say his articles about the NBA draft are his best work – although as with everything he does, it’s much better from a comedic standpoint than an analysis standpoint.
Hmmm…I consider Caple to be a buffoon who’s trying to be a poor man’s George Plimpton. While I enjoy his writing for the comedy content of being a 30+ year old married guy rooming in a frat house or sorority for a few nights I think he provides no actual sports insight.
Simmons I love because he’s just a fan (and I’m a native New Englander so I have a lot in common with him) of a lot of things. Without the NE background I don’t think you can relate to his jumping on & off the Sox bandwagon. He, like Caple, should not be read for analysis sake. Read him for the un-PC writing and the humor he brings to situations we’ve all encountered.
Neither of these guys is Neyer but they also aren’t Ralph Wiley (who’s style I couldn’t stand..Yes, I know, sacrilege) or the latest attempt at Page 2 analysis Scoop Jackson.
I wouldn’t accuse Caple of brilliance, by any means, but he’s a long sight ahead of Simmons — Caple can be quite sharp when that’s what he’s aiming at.
I still can’t tell if Simmons knows more about basketball than he does about other sports, or I know much less about basketball than other sports, so he seems more intelligent in that area. Oh well, I enjoy reading his columns even if he does occaisionally jump bandwagons and reach completely stupid conclusions.
My main problem with Simmons is his cult. He seems to play to them a little too much IMO. My second problem is that he romaticizes incredibly stupid problem gambling. My third is that he goes on way too much about basketball, a sport that I can’t get interested in because it’s rule book is so far from the way the game is played that officials are forced to make calls at random.
However – despite all of those and the fact that I am about as far from his target market as you can and still be a sports fan – I like his work sometimes.