Cubs want Chris Sale?

[cards press box]

On several levels,



And the Chicago Now article sucks, too. Of course the Cubs would like to have Chris Sale. As Dump Jerry rightly points out, so would every other major league club.

More pernicious, I think, is the assumption in the article that the Cubs have enough quality minor leaguers to obtain a pitcher like Sale. The Cubs have no legitimate prospects at AAA and the one legitimate prospect they have at AA, Javier Baez, didn't get there until he played 76 games at Daytona (high A level). Baez played 54 games at AA and, even though he had excellent power numbers (37 HR and 111 RBI at A and AA in 2013), he only hit .282 last year and struck out 147 times. I don't know what to make of all that.

Anyway, it bugs me when a Cub fan writes a blog in the Sun-Times saying how great it would be if the Cubs could somehow pry Chris Sale away from the White Sox.

Give me a break.

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by blandman

Loxas has been a "blogger" on Chicago Now for a while, and his "sources" have generally been correct. I'm tired of hearing people rag on bloggers because they somehow have less credibility than a newspaper, despite a wealth of evidence that it's just as much a pile of **** thrown at a wall.

Chicago Now is a joke network of "bloggers" which is basically anyone willing to sign up. Zero credibility there.

[blandman]

Originally Posted by spawn

When has he been correct? Just curious. Can you back this up?

Well, for one, he posted a while back that Sveum would be fired regardless of the Girardi situation, which wasn't a certainty. Either he's been guessing right a lot, or he has a credible source within the Cubs organization.

[blandman]

Originally Posted by doublem23

Chicago Now is a joke network of "bloggers" which is basically anyone willing to sign up. Zero credibility there.

What they do, turn you down?

You know what differentiates a blogger from a columnist? Physical print. That's it. Yeah, some sites you simply sign up for. But this isn't tumblr. There's a screening process, they don't overlap blog topics, they pay the writers, and they fire people. The only difference between that site and anywhere else is your attitude.

[kittle42]

Originally Posted by blandman

Well, for one, he posted a while back that Sveum would be fired regardless of the Girardi situation, which wasn't a certainty. Either he's been guessing right a lot, or he has a credible source within the Cubs organization.

To play devil's advocate, that's only one example, which was reported as rumor by several reporters, and which was a pretty easy scenario to guess correctly anyway. Hell, *I* thought it would easily happen.

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by blandman

What they do, turn you down?

You know what differentiates a blogger from a columnist? Physical print. That's it. Yeah, some sites you simply sign up for. But this isn't tumblr. There's a screening process, they don't overlap blog topics, they pay the writers, and they fire people. The only difference between that site and anywhere else is your attitude.

Uh, yeah, no, I can read and have critical thinking skills. Chicago Now is quite usually terrible, awful garbage.

I'm not saying all blogs are, some are very good, but that's a rare find.

[blandman]

Originally Posted by doublem23

Uh, yeah, no, I can read and have critical thinking skills. Chicago Now is quite usually terrible, awful garbage.

I'm not saying all blogs are, some are very good, but that's a rare find.

Well, finding it terrible is personal preference. I honestly don't see how it's any better or worse than what else is out there.

It should be noted that Future Sox, which is a great resource on our minor league system, has joined Chicago Now.

[kittle42]

Originally Posted by blandman

It should be noted that Future Sox, which is a great resource on our minor league system, has joined Chicago Now.

Now *that* must be a depressing blog.

[blandman]

Originally Posted by kittle42

Now *that* must be a depressing blog.

[russ99]

Originally Posted by DumpJerry

Breaking news.....breaking news....my sources (who are never wrong) tell me that all 29 MLB teams are interested in Adam Dunn................remaining with the White Sox. Surprisingly, the strongest interest for this development comes from the teams in the AL Central.

You take it to the bank. My sources scout the scouts.

[spawn]

Originally Posted by blandman

Well, for one, he posted a while back that Sveum would be fired regardless of the Girardi situation, which wasn't a certainty. Either he's been guessing right a lot, or he has a credible source within the Cubs organization.

Well, quite a few people were predicting THAT one. Hell, I'm sure there were people on other fan forums saying that would happen. Maybe a poster at one of those sites is his "source".

Originally Posted by kittle42

To play devil's advocate, that's only one example, which was reported as rumor by several reporters, and which was a pretty easy scenario to guess correctly anyway. Hell, *I* thought it would easily happen.

I rest my case. kittle42 is the source!

Got anything else?

[TDog]

Originally Posted by blandman

What they do, turn you down?

You know what differentiates a blogger from a columnist? Physical print. That's it. Yeah, some sites you simply sign up for. But this isn't tumblr. There's a screening process, they don't overlap blog topics, they pay the writers, and they fire people. The only difference between that site and anywhere else is your attitude.

Don't take it as a personal insult when I write that you aren't simply wrong, but you have no idea what you are talking about, because it isn't meant to be one.

Columnists are generally professionally trained. Even the ones who haven't been trained have gained skills through professional experience that bloggers do not have, although there is an overlap because many columnists now are required to blog. It isn't just a matter of being a member of some sort of a club or fraternity to work for a print publication. If a newspaper pays someone a living wage to write, the person it hires in turn must be responsible because the publication is obligated to defend itself against any legal action that could arise from the course of employment.

This has become fuzzy in people's minds because the Internet has destroyed the concept of news for many. When you get to sports, people have an even harder time dealing with the difference between professionalism and bloggers because professional standards in sports coverage has become lax. Responsible journalists don't use unnamed sources except in extreme circumstances with extreme stakes. For one thing, they don't have credibility. For another, they are notoriously unreliable because sources aren't as meticulous about the truth when they are talking with people as unnamed sources. If you are a blogger with no professional training and limited experience in dealing with sourcing information for public consumption, you are more likely to screw up information from anonymous sources. There have been professionals caught simply making things up from unnamed sources, and non-professional are more likely to be unprofessional in this regard. Unfortunately, professional sports journalists are permitted to use unnamed sources frequently, apparently because news organizations don't hold sports departments to news standards. Professional ethics and standards require that if a news story has an unnamed source, that the source has to be identified to editors and cleared, which probably doesn't happen with sports stories and certainly isn't happening with sites with blogs, even with sites that pay bloggers for their contributions.

In sports coverage, most things you read, regardless of the source, that don't have attributed sources are not 100 percent true. Most things you read in blogs are not true, and the things you read in blogs that are true are more likely to be repeated from professional journalists.

I would be inclined to regard what I read in a blog anymore than I would believe someone sitting at a Denny's counter who talks like he seems to know what's going on.

[DumpJerry]

Originally Posted by blandman

Well, for one, he posted a while back that Sveum would be fired regardless of the Girardi situation, which wasn't a certainty. Either he's been guessing right a lot, or he has a credible source within the Cubs organization.

Since late August there was rampant speculation all over the local media that Sveum was toast after this season.

[kittle42]

Originally Posted by TDog

Don't take it as a personal insult when I write that you aren't simply wrong, but you have no idea what you are talking about, because it isn't meant to be one.

Columnists are generally professionally trained. Even the ones who haven't been trained have gained skills through professional experience that bloggers do not have, although there is an overlap because many columnists now are required to blog. It isn't just a matter of being a member of some sort of a club or fraternity to work for a print publication. If a newspaper pays someone a living wage to write, the person it hires in turn must be responsible because the publication is obligated to defend itself against any legal action that could arise from the course of employment.

This has become fuzzy in people's minds because the Internet has destroyed the concept of news for many. When you get to sports, people have an even harder time dealing with the difference between professionalism and bloggers because professional standards in sports coverage has become lax. Responsible journalists don't use unnamed sources except in extreme circumstances with extreme stakes. For one thing, they don't have credibility. For another, they are notoriously unreliable because sources aren't as meticulous about the truth when they are talking with people as unnamed sources. If you are a blogger with no professional training and limited experience in dealing with sourcing information for public consumption, you are more likely to screw up information from anonymous sources. There have been professionals caught simply making things up from unnamed sources, and non-professional are more likely to be unprofessional in this regard. Unfortunately, professional sports journalists are permitted to use unnamed sources frequently, apparently because news organizations don't hold sports departments to news standards. Professional ethics and standards require that if a news story has an unnamed source, that the source has to be identified to editors and cleared, which probably doesn't happen with sports stories and certainly isn't happening with sites with blogs, even with sites that pay bloggers for their contributions.

In sports coverage, most things you read, regardless of the source, that don't have attributed sources are not 100 percent true. Most things you read in blogs are not true, and the things you read in blogs that are true are more likely to be repeated from professional journalists.

I would be inclined to regard what I read in a blog anymore than I would believe someone sitting at a Denny's counter who talks like he seems to know what's going on.

First, munch tends to think all disagreement with him is a personal attack.

Second, good post.

[blandman]

Originally Posted by TDog

Don't take it as a personal insult when I write that you aren't simply wrong, but you have no idea what you are talking about, because it isn't meant to be one.

Columnists are generally professionally trained. Even the ones who haven't been trained have gained skills through professional experience that bloggers do not have, although there is an overlap because many columnists now are required to blog. It isn't just a matter of being a member of some sort of a club or fraternity to work for a print publication. If a newspaper pays someone a living wage to write, the person it hires in turn must be responsible because the publication is obligated to defend itself against any legal action that could arise from the course of employment.

This has become fuzzy in people's minds because the Internet has destroyed the concept of news for many. When you get to sports, people have an even harder time dealing with the difference between professionalism and bloggers because professional standards in sports coverage has become lax. Responsible journalists don't use unnamed sources except in extreme circumstances with extreme stakes. For one thing, they don't have credibility. For another, they are notoriously unreliable because sources aren't as meticulous about the truth when they are talking with people as unnamed sources. If you are a blogger with no professional training and limited experience in dealing with sourcing information for public consumption, you are more likely to screw up information from anonymous sources. There have been professionals caught simply making things up from unnamed sources, and non-professional are more likely to be unprofessional in this regard. Unfortunately, professional sports journalists are permitted to use unnamed sources frequently, apparently because news organizations don't hold sports departments to news standards. Professional ethics and standards require that if a news story has an unnamed source, that the source has to be identified to editors and cleared, which probably doesn't happen with sports stories and certainly isn't happening with sites with blogs, even with sites that pay bloggers for their contributions.

In sports coverage, most things you read, regardless of the source, that don't have attributed sources are not 100 percent true. Most things you read in blogs are not true, and the things you read in blogs that are true are more likely to be repeated from professional journalists.

I would be inclined to regard what I read in a blog anymore than I would believe someone sitting at a Denny's counter who talks like he seems to know what's going on.

No, I'm sorry, you are wrong. I also don't mean to be insulting, but it's attitude's like yours that are perpetrated by the print media to discredit the internet.

Whether or not someone has been trained has no bearing on their status as a columnist. A columnist is someone who writes in print media. Someone who writes for a website is only also a columnist if they contribute to a print media. Those that write strictly on the internet are bloggers. Those are solid definitions with no bearing on training. Now, most blogs write like op ed pieces sure, but do you call into question sports editorials in print media simply because they're such?

The majority of what you find on the internet off of pages like tumblr and other post your own blog sites are of course not what we're talking about. Yes, they come with the name "blogger", but any joe with a zine is also a "columnist" in exactly the same why. To criticize a web only writer because they're a "blogger" show little understanding of how the term differs from other terms used to carry some sort of imaginary credentials.