Posted by crazystengel on 12/17/2018 12:15:00 AM (view original):
Would love to see Nixon/Elvis vs. Trump/Canseco on The $20,000 Pyramid.

ELVIS: It's a thing, man, one a them little things you play the guitar with.
NIXON: Tiny Tim?
ELVIS: Nah, man. A little thing, ya hold it in your fingers, it's made a plastic.
NIXON: Checkers?
ELVIS: Think a Scotty Moore, man. You hit the guitar strings with it!
NIXON: Hammer?
CANSECO: Baseball bat?
DICK CLARK: Hold up, Jose. It's not your turn.
TRUMP: But is it a baseball bat? If it is, we should get that point, Dick.

Major props for the sly Checkers reference, crazy.

was it sly tho rilly

sly

Pick. Pick was the answer we were looking for.

yeah no sh*t

"You do this with cotton. You do this with your nose. You do this with a fruit or vegetable that's ripe."

Tricky Dick woulda got it if Elvis hadna been so focused on the guitar angle. Does Nixon even know who Scotty Moore is? Doubtful.

Tricky may not have known who Scotty was, but he knew a thing or two about Jailhouse Rock.

Keith Richard(s): "Everyone else wanted to be Elvis. I wanted to be Scotty."

Bill, Mookie Betts was quoted as saying he won't visit the White House after the Red Sox received an invitation after winning the World Series. Would you go if you were invited right now?
Asked by: Steve9753

Answered: 2/4/2019

Perhaps I should not comment.

---

Ha!

A quick question. I was looking at Tony Phillips career, which really took off when he got to Detroit, at the age of thirty, and played for George "Sparky" Anderson. Is it true that Sparky has a knack for getting the very best out of his hitters?
Asked by: DavidTodd

Answered: 2/27/2019
Sparky is dead.

---

He could have offered some insight here, but Bill James would rather be a boring pedant: "Hey, you wrote has instead of had!" I don't know why but he seems to do this a lot on his site.

Anyway, the Sparky Anderson question reminded me of a passage from his New Historical Abstract:

I was once described by a now-defunct publication as 'the guru of baseball statistics,' and by Sparky Anderson as 'a little fat guy with a beard who knows nothing about nothing.' Actually, I’m seven inches taller than Sparky is, but what the heck, three out of four ain’t bad, and it sure beats being described as the guru of baseball statistics.

James still has the occasional interesting angle in his work, but...and it pains me to say this because I have been reading his stuff since 1982, and he shaped my views not just on baseball but on many other topics...he has become a stereotypical codger. He is argumentative, self-righteous, dismissive, condescending, and comes across as extremely elitist. Despite the fact that he frequently rails against "elitism." I used to subscribe to his site...now except for the occasional article I can't really stomach him.

Posted by contrarian23 on 2/28/2019 8:21:00 PM (view original):
James still has the occasional interesting angle in his work, but...and it pains me to say this because I have been reading his stuff since 1982, and he shaped my views not just on baseball but on many other topics...he has become a stereotypical codger. He is argumentative, self-righteous, dismissive, condescending, and comes across as extremely elitist. Despite the fact that he frequently rails against "elitism." I used to subscribe to his site...now except for the occasional article I can't really stomach him.

^
unfortunately, same with me. I read his early tomes cover to cover several times. James has become crotchety.

The sourness extends beyond his writing on his site. A little over a year ago I posted a review of his crime book The Man from the Train in the "What are you reading?" thread. Overall I liked it, but had to comment on something I found off-putting:

I disliked James' condescending attitude to the reader. Plenty of times he explains the differences between early 20th and early 21st century life as if he's a kindergarten teacher speaking to his students. If you're holding in your hands a 462-page book and reading it, then chances are you realize, for example, there was no Internet, TV and radio in 1908 (a point James feels necessary to make more than once). He seems to think he's the only one with common sense and empathy. This culminates in a two-page rant near the end of the book that's truly weird. Directly addressing the reader, he defends people from 100 years ago as having lived lives just as rich and varied and interesting as people today. He writes about his own childhood in the 1950s and says that despite growing up in a small town there was plenty to do, it wasn't boring or uneventful. And he says if you (the reader) think that, you are "despicable" and guilty of "bigotry" and "you are revealing yourself to be an ignorant *******" (if WIS is censoring that last word for you, it's "a-hole"). Anyway, just a completely bizarre thing to include in a book like this. I can only assume that someone from his past made fun of James for being from a small town in Kansas, so he carries this huge chip on his shoulder, and he chose this opportunity to let loose.

P.S. It's worth clicking on the link above just to see italyprof's response to my review. I miss him in the forums!

Posted by crazystengel on 2/28/2019 5:37:00 PM (view original):

A quick question. I was looking at Tony Phillips career, which really took off when he got to Detroit, at the age of thirty, and played for George "Sparky" Anderson. Is it true that Sparky has a knack for getting the very best out of his hitters?
Asked by: DavidTodd

Answered: 2/27/2019
Sparky is dead.

---

He could have offered some insight here, but Bill James would rather be a boring pedant: "Hey, you wrote has instead of had!" I don't know why but he seems to do this a lot on his site.

Anyway, the Sparky Anderson question reminded me of a passage from his New Historical Abstract:

I was once described by a now-defunct publication as 'the guru of baseball statistics,' and by Sparky Anderson as 'a little fat guy with a beard who knows nothing about nothing.' Actually, I’m seven inches taller than Sparky is, but what the heck, three out of four ain’t bad, and it sure beats being described as the guru of baseball statistics.

its a way to clear the decks of Qs he's not really interested in answering

empties the inbox no effort at all

ten seconds and done

out of the soft pants and into the golf shorts

Posted by contrarian23 on 2/28/2019 8:21:00 PM (view original):
James still has the occasional interesting angle in his work, but...and it pains me to say this because I have been reading his stuff since 1982, and he shaped my views not just on baseball but on many other topics...he has become a stereotypical codger. He is argumentative, self-righteous, dismissive, condescending, and comes across as extremely elitist. Despite the fact that he frequently rails against "elitism." I used to subscribe to his site...now except for the occasional article I can't really stomach him.

I agree.