Bob Smizik's Blog

Author

Veteran sports commentator Bob Smizik offers his strong views on the major sports topics of the day.

Register to comment
Guide to commenting

Bob's Q&A

Have a question for me on sports? Click here to e-mail your question to me ... I'll answer as many as I can in future blog posts.

 

Blog Roll

Sports blogs
Steelers: Blog 'n' Gold
Penguins: Empty Netters
Pirates: PBC Blog
College Sports: Redshirt Diaries
High School: Varsity Blog
Fantasy Sports: The Fantasy Factor
 
Sports online

``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''

Thursday, 1 p.m

The Pirates might have fallen off the rader for most people beyond Pittsburgh, and even for many living in the region, but not for Murray Chass. A graduate of Allderdice and Pitt, Chass was a long-time sports reporter for the New York Times. He covered the New York Yankees from 1970-86 and later was a national baseball writer for The Times. He was elected to the writer's wing of the Baseball Hall of Fame in 2003. As a young reporter working for the Associated Press in Pittsburgh, he covered the 1960 World Series. He grew up rooting for the Pirates and, judging from the piece below, still has a concern for them.  He has written a strong condemnation of the Pirates and suggests the team needs to be investigatged by Major League Baseball.  I've posted his entire column about the Pirates but you can read more from him at MurrayChass.com. -- Bob Smizik

 

PIRATES GET $40 MILLION, PLAYERS $20 MILLION

By Murray Chass

As the season dwindles down to a precious few weeks, attention is focused on remaining races - not that there are any - and the playoffs ahead. But pause for a moment in your excited anticipation and think of how Pittsburgh Pirates fans approach the post-season.

They may actually look forward to it eagerly because once they get beyond Oct. 4, the Pirates can’t lose any more games this year. They probably can’t make any more trades either because they have already traded everybody of value.

On second thought they have Andrew McCutchen on their roster, and if they traded Nyjer Morgan they can trade Andrew McCutchen.

Simply put, the Pirates are an embarrassment to Pittsburgh and an embarrassment to Major League Baseball. It’s not just that the Pirates are a poor team, a losing team, but they are an embarrassment because of the way they have become a worse team than they already were and how they are trying to hoodwink their fans.

The Pirates this year traded Nate McLouth, Morgan, Adam LaRoche, Freddy Sanchez, Jack Wilson, Eric Hinske, Ian Snell, Tom Gorzelanny, John Grabow and Sean Burnett. You could almost put a team on the field with that lineup.

The team the Pirates were left with on the field has been far worse than that one would be, and that’s what prompts this mid-September look at this terrible team.

When the Pirates completed their roster cleansing July 30, they had a 43-58 record (.426) and were 11 ½ games from first place. Since then, through Monday’s games, they had a 12-29 record (.293) and had tumbled 28 ½ games from first.

In the interim they set a major league record by insuring their 17th successive losing season, but they were going to get that record with the players they traded away; it would just have taken them longer. 

If the Pirates incur losses in their last 20 games at the same rate they have lost since July 30, they will finish with a 60-102 record (.370), their worst record in the 17-season stretch and their second worst record since the early 1950s and the days of Vic Janowicz, the O’Brien twins Johnny and Eddie and Joe Garagiola.

At least those teams had Ralph Kiner, the perennial National League home run champion, who gave the fans a reason to go to Forbes Field. Why fans go to PNC Park is beyond me. For their last home stand, six games with the Cardinals and the Cubs, the Pirates drew a total of 105,000 fans.

To get 17,500 fans a game is remarkable. I would speculate that the fans went to the games because they had previously bought tickets, but why do Pittsburgh fans have to buy tickets in advance when there are plenty of seats available the day of a game? Maybe the fans go to games just to see PNC Park, the nicest new park in my opinion. Or maybe they just like baseball.

But do these Pirates play a credible game of baseball? Maybe it doesn’t matter. The Pirates of the early ‘50s didn’t play a credible game of baseball, but I frequently paid a dollar for a seat in the left field bleachers at Forbes Field nevertheless and not just for the chance to see Kiner hit a home run. I was not one of those fans who left after Kiner had batted for the last time. 

But today’s fans should not be so kind to the Pirates because management is cheating them and trying to fool them. Club executives justify the trades by saying they have to start over by accumulating good minor league prospects and building with them.

But what was Morgan? He was a rookie who showed he was ready to play in the majors. He was hitting .271 when he was traded, and he has hit .351 for Washington for a .307 season average.

They didn’t need to trade Morgan to make room in the outfield for McCutchen because McCutchen was already there and hitting .295 in his first month. They didn’t need to trade Morgan to get Lastings Milledge, another young outfielder, because they didn’t need Milledge, who in trials with the Mets and the Nationals had failed to demonstrate major league maturity.

“The bottom line for us is upside and potential,” general manager Neal Huntington said at the time he made the trade. “The two players we are getting in return are guys that we think can play quality roles for us as we return to winning baseball here in Pittsburgh. Both players, we feel, have the upside to be above-average Major League players, and that’s why the trade happened.”

The Pirates, however, already had those players in Morgan and Burnett. Trading them was bizarre judgment at best and poor judgment at worst.

The belief among officials of other clubs is that the Pirates traded Morgan because of his age. At 29, he is five years older than Milledge. The Pirates, though, shouldn’t be concerned about having a 35-year-old Morgan playing center field for them. They would have traded him well before they reached that juncture.

There is more. The Pirates traded their middle infield, Sanchez and Wilson, not to stockpile minor league talent but because Sanchez and Wilson, who had expressed a desire to stay in Pittsburgh, rejected woefully underpriced contract offers designed for effect.

The offers were designed (1) to show fans that the Pirates tried to sign Sanchez and Wilson and (2) to induce them to say no so that the Pirates could then justify trading them because they did not plan on exercising their contract options totaling $16.4 million for next year.

Perhaps the most striking figures are the payroll numbers. The Pirates opened the season with a $48.7 million payroll. They are closing it with a payroll (based on the Aug. 31 roster and disabled list) of $20 million. The players they traded during the season have salaries totaling $31 million.

Now for the kicker. The Pirates, one of the smallest revenue teams in the majors, received approximately $40 million in revenue sharing last year and most likely will get at least that much, despite the economy, for this year. One thing we know for sure. They aren’t spending the money to pay players.

Under the collective bargaining agreement, teams that receive money have to notify the commissioner’s office each April what they did with the money the previous year. “They’re going to have some explaining to do,” a baseball official said. “It’s going to be difficult for them absent some substantial moves between now and April.”

High-revenue teams don’t appreciate revenue recipients that don’t spend the money to improve themselves but pocket it instead. The commissioner’s office is supposed to monitor the spending to make sure teams use the money as they’re supposed to, but no team has ever been disciplined or even reprimanded for not using it correctly.

The Pirates might be a good place for the commissioner to start. It would be the best win for the fans all year.

 


Posted Sep 17 2009, 01:00 PM by Bob Smizik

Comments

chancellorpink wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 1:21 PM

an excellent piece, and kudos to you, Mr. Smizik, for publishing it in your blog despite the fact that it disagrees with several positions you have taken regarding the team during the course of this season.  great to see that other respected "national" baseball minds agree with the majority of fans here in doubting, not merely the ownership, but also the present Bucco management team.

the chancellor

mundyscorner99 wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 1:46 PM

"The Pirates this year traded Nate McLouth, Morgan, Adam LaRoche, Freddy Sanchez, Jack Wilson, Eric Hinske, Ian Snell, Tom Gorzelanny, John Grabow and Sean Burnett. You could almost put a team on the field with that lineup."

They did have that team...and it STUNK.  They were going absolutely nowhere with those players mentioned, so what does it hurt to try and trade those players to get some younger talent.  Skeptics will say this is what they have done in the past, but they really haven't done it to a full extent like they are doing now.   People like this guy have a right to be upset because it is frustrating to see the team as it is, but let's give this plan a chance.  

The Cubs haven't won a WS in over 100 years, and haven't been competitive for most of those years.  So, they may have a few more winning seasons than the Pirates do, but I don't see people piling on them and calling them an embarrassment for not winning a championshp for generations.  Would you rather have that record around here, Pittsburgh?  The memories of the '60, '71, and '79 WS Titles are part of this team's great history...we could be alot worse.

BetterDaysComing wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 1:54 PM

Bob,

Perhaps if Mr. Chass had chosen to research the situation a little more he would have received answers to most of the questions he poses in the column.  But it would appear that the intent of the column was not to find answers but to blast the front office for what he feels is the ruination of the franchise.  I think anyone close to the situation realizes that said ruination happened over quite a few years and the people in charge then are not the same as they are now.

I'm as frustrated as anyone but this column was full of speculation, accusation and innuendo.  I read the same tripe on any number of blogs.  I don't need more conspiracy theories, I need better drafting and player development by the Pirates, something that I believe has been more evident over the past two years.

In summary, it just seemed to be a waste of ink or disk space on Mr. Chass's behalf.  Thanks, Bob.  I always enjoy your work.

daquido_bazzini wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 2:02 PM

Mr. Chass is 100% correct in his analysis of the Pirate organization.

We need more of this in hopes of turning the pressure up to a frenzy pitch targeting Nutting and henchmen.

If MLB had a decent bone in its body, the Pirate ownership & front office would be investigated and tossed out of MLB on its ear.

Unfortunately, they have a small propaganda base that continues to fight for them.....ala the poster above me.

I've said it a thousand times, and I'll continue to say it.....You don't subtract talent when attempting to be a winning club. You keep the best pieces, and manipulate from there.

It's all been done before to the tune of 17 ugly years....and counting.

When it's all said and done ....From July '08 till July '09 will be the year that brought this franchise and it's fan to its knees for years to come.

What Nutting, Coonelly & Huntington have done is nothing short of outright thievery. They should be made to pay a giant price for their actions, and I feel they will in due time.

Justice has a way of eventually coming around and grabbing those who have abused it.

socaldonn wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 2:17 PM

daquido,

Always good to read your inspired jottings!

I would tend to agree more with Mundy and Better Days for reasons that have been debated ad nauseum on other PG blogs.  

I would agree with you that you don't want to subtract talent to get better but with the caveat that I wouldn't part with exceptional talent which is something this organization just didn't have.  I would also argue that it is the proper means to better the organization as a whole rather than just concentrating on the major league product.  While the pain is greater short term, and we are certainly feeling that pain now, I believe it will accelerate the process and provide a better, more competitive product in Pittsburgh sooner than if they were keeping the previous core and relying simply on drafting to rebuild.

Ultimately we have the same goals and desires but just disagree on the route to get us there.  Does that make me a propagandist?

Oh, and Go Dodgers.  

Thundercrack wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 2:21 PM

I enjoy Mr. Chass' work --and I didn't realize his Pgh connection.  But I have to wonder if someone just woke him up.  The Pirates traded Nyjer Morgan on July 1.  Why is he making this the centerpiece of his article now?

He writes:

"The belief among officials of other clubs is that the Pirates traded Morgan because of his age. At 29, he is five years older than Milledge. The Pirates, though, shouldn’t be concerned about having a 35-year-old Morgan playing center field for them. They would have traded him well before they reached that juncture."

Well if they were going to trade him eventually anyway, what is wrong with trading him now?

genemingo wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 2:28 PM

I think it IS time Moe, Larry and Curly (aka the Pirates administration) was thoroughly investigated.  I have been screaming this from the rooftops for quite some time...not only is it illegal, according to the CBA, what The Terrible Trio has done/is doing, it's downright immoral.  There's also got to be some sort of franchise agreement they are violating with the City of Pitttsburgh, since they used taxpayer money to build PNC, by not fielding a competitive team.  In all honesty, however, it comes down to the fans....if you don't like the product, don't buy it!!!  Don't buy the tickets, the lousy food and the merchandise, even if it means missing out on concerts, fireworks, bobbleheads and t-shirts.

concave77 wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 2:31 PM

You nailed it with your first comment, Mundy. I was thinking the same thing. I find it bizarre that people, especially those in the national media I've noticed, bash the Pirates for trading away guys like Wilson, Snell, Gorzellany, LaRoche, Sanchez, etc. -- saying their being cheap or whatever. Uh, last time I checked, most of those guys aren't that good. How exactly would the Pirates get better by giving contract extensions to a bunch of mediocre players? If you want to talk about trading McLough and Bay as "salary dumps" or whatever, then fine. I don't agree with it, but at least they were good players (although both a bit overrated here).

Also, I don't really understand why he's so hung up on the Morgan-Milledge trade. That's the one trade that no one can argue was a salary dump because the Pirates traded a rookie for a player with several years of experience who was closer to arbitration and free agency.

I don't really understand how Chass would propose the Pirates, you know, get better. By keeping mediocre players at inflated salaries? By not making risky trades for high-upside players, but instead holding onto said mediocre players? Wait, I forgot. If you immediately raise the payroll to $80 million wins will magically come your way automatically. It doesn't even matter on whom you spend it!

daquido_bazzini wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 2:36 PM

Socaldonn---Don't worry.....as they "certainly haven't" concentrated on the ML product as you saw firsthand in the three games against the Dodgers.

It looked like a small college team playing professionals.

As for drafting, etc....That is like saying someone can't sing and play guitar (as I've said before) at the same time.

You're welcome to your opinion, but you'll eat those words in the next year or so. I'm quite certain of it.

Oh....And keep rooting for the Dodgers.

It wouldn't make any sense to root for their Double A team (at best).....the Pittsburgh Pirates.

Navy Author wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 2:48 PM

The Bucs had a few nice players but no foundation. Stockpiling youth in the minors is the way to go.  Throwing ten mil at a washed up pitcher is just bad business.

McCutcheon and Morgan are similar players but McCutcheon is the better player in my opinion, while Millege is different and willl probably be good imajor leaguer with power.  If Hanrahan turns into a competent closer case closed, good trade.

I do believe this though. If this is a building process then by all means build.  Sano is still out there and with this windfall of cash I for one will be extremely dissappointed if he isn't  signed.

We may have to deal once again with Borass the Terrible.  I just hope that if it comes down to it in next years draft that they do the right thing and take the best player as they did with Pedro Alvarez.

And finally I do think there is a little hipocrisy in the national press.  They may throw fashionable barbs at the Bucs but none of them would be sad to see the Dodgers play the Yankees in the World Series.

I am still of the mindset with Coonelly and Huntington of wait and see. We are watching their moves very closely. I hope they aren't just passing the Koolaide jar.

socaldonn wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:08 PM

daquido,

Fortunately I was traveling this week and missed the carnage in Chavez Ravine.  I agree that the ML product is brutal.  There's no defending it.

Just to clarify, I believe it is indeed possible to rebuild strictly via the draft as you advocate.  My point is that the trade of major league players is a faster way to infuse talent throughout the organization which, IMO, was something that was long overdue and sorely lacking.  

As an aside, I've been in Seattle and they've alredy tired of Ian Snell up here.  Though sporting a 4-2 record, his ERA is 4.86 and has walked 30 while striking out 25 in 46 innings.  That's on top of the 43 hits he's gven up.    

Jack Wilson is hitting .224 and has committed 5 errors already.  The fans are feeling fleeced.

Californication wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:11 PM

It is all about the money....

If the Pirates are truly interested in winning by gathering a critical mass of high caliber prospects they could pay other teams to acquire them and trade for higher picks etc.

Nutting changes until the Nutting changes.

Robbiesdad wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:15 PM

I'm sort of on the fence regarding this piece - and this whole subject, really.  

On one hand, I do feel the fans are being forced to accept an inferior product while the new (completely unproven and hired on the cheap) front office attempts to build through the farm system - a plan that may (or may never) pan out.

On the other, it's true that LaRoche, Wilson, McLouth, etal hadn't been able to lift this team from it's near-comatose status, so throwing money at them would have been foolhardy.

Fact is, we are fortunate to have a Major League franchise (even if it is currently in name only - not in performance).  Coonnelly, Huntington and crew may fail miserably, but at least they are trying something.

Thundercrack wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:18 PM

Cal,

They don't trade draft picks in baseball.  And they don't allow many straight cash for a prospect trade either.

MarkInDallas wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:21 PM

If the Pirates go into next year with a payroll of under $25M, does that mean they are trying to "snooker" their fans?

You tell me...

Last year the Marlins had a $22M payroll. Were they trying to snooker their fans? No, they had a plan and this year are 10 games over .500 and fighting for a playoff spot.

The year before, the Rays had $24M payroll. Were they trying to snooker their fans? No, they went to the World Series last year and this year have a $63M payroll.

Both Florida and Tampa fielded competitive teams soon after lowering their payrolls to that level.  

Will that happen with the Pirates? I don't know. But I do know that just because a team has a low payroll, it doesn't mean they don't have a plan to get better, and it doesn't  mean they don't have a commitment to getting better. And it sure doesn't mean they are trying to "snooker" their fan base. It just means that at the moment, they don't have many players who have proven they are worth a lot of money.

I still don't understand what any of that has to do with Nyjer Morgan, and apparently neither does Mr Chass.

Thundercrack wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:23 PM

Mark in D,

I agree with you about the payroll.

regarding Chass' article I think it is just a case of someone running out of things to write about and just picked something out a hat.....

PittsburghSeth wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:25 PM

I have a couple of problems with Mr. Chass' article, namely:

The Pirates' contract offer to Wilson this summer was very fair, especially considering that Wilson does very little with the bat and will be in his mid 30's when the Pirates have any chance of putting together a winning team.

It's nearly impossible to judge Morgan's abilities based on this year alone. He played very well this year, but his performance was terrible last year and he barely made the team coming out of spring training. Besides, NO ONE in baseball will tell you that Morgan has more upside than Lastings Milledge. Milledge has the potential to be a five-tool guy, and the Pirates couldn't afford to have a left fielder with no power (Morgan). It's also interesting that Mr. Chass didn't mention that Milledge has actually played some decent baseball since coming to the Pirates. He makes it sound like Milledge offers nothing productive.

I very much respect Mr. Chass' writing, but this article could have benefited from a little more research and information.

JuniataKid wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:31 PM

Just one more voice blaming 17 years of losing on people who've been in charge for two.

The fact is, the whole thing needed to be blown up in 1993 and it wasn't. It was 16 years of trying to placate fans with half measures, while the minors were reduced to has-beens who posted great records in Altoona but would never contribute on the major league level. "The future looks bright! Our minor league teams were all in the playoffs!" It was a sham.

This front office blew it up and blew it up good. They knew they'd invite the rage of constant complainers and the scorn of an otherwise-occupied national media, but they blew it up anyway. Kudos.

MarkInDallas wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:41 PM

One more thing about Chass and the people who somehow feel MLB should "investigate" the Pirates.

Frank Coonelly was recommended by Bud Selig for the job. That's how he GOT the job.

Coonelly and company have done exactly what they said they would do, which is build from within and stockpile prospects in the minors.

When you trade your MLB experienced players for inexperienced players, this obviously lowers your MLB payroll.

So, why the heck would Bud Selig investigate the Pirates, when he himself suggested Frank Coonelly would be a good guy to help make that happen?

If anyone thinks Selig would recommend his good friend Coonelly without asking him his ideas on the situation, I'm sorry, they are just not paying attention.

daquido_bazzini wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:45 PM

If you think the Nuttings have been involved for only two years....you're either sadly informed....or related to them in some way, shape or form.

That's ridiculous, and I'm not going to sit around and let garbage talk like that go without exposing it.

It's the same King....Just a different court of jesters.

I'm tired of hearing the same bullcrap for 17 years.

Put a ML team on the field....or get out of the business!

Pure & simple.

Californication wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:47 PM

Yes, but....there are creative ways around these antiquated MLB "rules."

As an example, in the NBA trades are often made to relieve team of under performning, high $ players.  One team will take the bullet and assume the contract in order to get access to the rights of a higer performing, low $ player....yes there is a salary cap BUT this model would work in MLB.

As an example, say PIT traded with SF for Barry Zito and his BIG contract.  PIT get Zito and the rights to Giants high caliber Giants pitching prospects and the Giants get salary relief and rights to lower valued prospects.  Giants then pay Lincecum and Cain (proven MLBers).

Yes it is risky but is a case where using $$ gets can acquire future prospects and when done with some creative planning one might actually point to the future period where the high priced contracts expire and the new prospects are brought up.....

WRT to the draft....again use similar tactics in order to move up and acquire rights to specificly targetted high value prospects.

This strategy involves spending money today to get better tomorrow.....whereas the Pirates "strategy" is don't spend money today and hope things get better tomorrow.

daquido_bazzini wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:48 PM

Ever notice how all the "pro-Nutters" come out of the wood work when an article like this gets national attention?

 

JimBibbySweat wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 3:58 PM

I don't think the Pirates have gotten very much undesired attention, such as this article, because the team just isn't relevant to anyone else across the country. There are flaws in the story ie Jack Wilson passing up $4 million when he's not going to get that anywhere else, but it's nice to read that some cares, even if that person has ties to the Pirates' past.  

socaldonn wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 4:08 PM

daquido,

Please don't blow my cover as one of Nutting's covert blog agents!!  Though he doesn't pay that well (duh) it still helps me to make ends meet.

I'm sure I speak for the others on this link.  Thanks in advance for keeping it quiet.

MattB wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 4:09 PM

postgazette.com/.../753923-63.stm

1/15/2007

"The most obvious is that the Nuttings, for the first time, have firm control."

MarkInDallas wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 4:21 PM

Californication -

MLB teams CAN'T MOVE UP in the draft. It is NOT ALLOWED. Please show us one instance where it has happened if you think it's possible.

Secondly, the Pirates have already done a version of what you are suggesting by paying the salaries of the players they trade. This enables them to get better prospects in return.

To suggest they pay Barry Zito's salary to get good prospects from the Giants wouldn't work unless the Pirates somehow could get at least half of the Giants' top 10 prospects, which the Giants would never do.

You would assume the Giants would want that salary relief because they could then use that money on quality free agents. Of course, the Pirates could also use that money on quality free agents.

Barry Zito is due $18M-$20M per year for the next 5 years. Obviously, you could get 2-5 very nice quality and proven free agents for that money.

So to get the number of prospects from the Giants to have your investment work out, you would need to get at least 4 to 7 prospects from the Giants to be assured that you would get the same return if you just purchased those free agents.

This is not a good deal for the Giants, because they would be losing their future stars, and they still wouldn't have even purchased one free agent to replace Zito. So they would be even more reliant on free agents in the future, and that would mean they would need to spend even more money.

The moral of that story is if you make a bad free agent contract that you later regret, you are stuck paying that money in some way, unless you can find a sucker to take it off your hands like the Pirates did with Matt Morris.

joerevs300 wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 4:24 PM

Like anything that has 2 sides, you've got 2 sides to this one:

- The die hard fans that, literally, will accept anything management or the organization is doing to improve the team at face value

and

- The fans that are fed up with 17 years of losing and lies, and quite frankly aren't going to believe that any management or ownership of the Pirates are serious about putting a winning product on the field.

I take issue with the Florida Marlins example because TWICE during the same period as the Pirates have they completely firesaled their roster after winning the WS, and that's not the same as the Pirates fielding a $20 one.  You definitely cannot call the Pirates "fire sellers".

As for the Rays, exactly what are they doing this year?  They certainly won't make the playoffs.  A 1 year flash in the pan if you ask me, though most Pirate fans would take that in a heartbeat.  Things are already starting to unravel for the Rays.

Unless that $20 million that Mr. Chass mentions is accounted for by the Pirates, I would definitely have to seriously question if they are doing things within the rules.

Then again, if you want your daily dose of Kool Aid, just head on over to the game forums for the Pirates.  There will be plenty of fans there to root with you for the new regime's rebuilding mission.

MattB wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 4:35 PM

"Unless that $20 million that Mr. Chass mentions is accounted for by the Pirates, I would definitely have to seriously question if they are doing things within the rules."

That's an easy one: his numbers are wrong.  I'm not sure what the revenue sharing amount is (I think it's something like $25 million), but the payroll is right around $48 million for the season.

MattB wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 4:39 PM

www.post-gazette.com/.../984970-63.stm

"Last year, the Pirates are believed to have received a revenue sharing check of $27 million from MLB, based on figures leaked to the Wall Street Journal."

So both numbers in Murray's headline are totally off.  Good work.

MarkInDallas wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 5:00 PM

joerevs,

The point is that a $20M payroll does not mean the team is trying to snooker fans. Both the Marlins and the Rays followed successful plans that included a $20M payroll.

Obviously, the Marlins have sold off their team twice as you mentioned, because they did not have the stadium deal in place to be able to take advantage of increased revenue from those championship teams. They had to start all over again - like the Pirates - but of course Florida had better players to trade and so were able to win faster than the Pirates will be able to.

As for the Rays, they are in the most difficult division in MLB, so they are going to have an uphill battle every year to finish with a winning record, let alone win the division. However, the Rays still have a very strong minor league system, and have some very nice prospects poised to be added to their MLB roster next year.

Their AAA team, the Durham Bulls, is up 2-0 in the AAA championship against the Yankees' AAA team.

So, they are not a one year wonder. They are at this moment a model franchise for the Pirates to follow.

allablaze wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 5:01 PM

Nonsense with the money angle.  It is, and continues to be, the inability to judge talent.

Most if not all of the players the Pirates received from trades are borderline talent except for Ross Ohlendorph.  Brandon Moss and Andy LaRoche are not major league talents.  The jury is still out on Milledge.

MarkInDallas wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 5:26 PM

allablaze -

I agree with you that it hinges on the ability to judge talent.

I'll also say that Ohlendorf, before mid year 2009, also looked like a border-line MLB player. His ERA over 6 last year didn't have people very enthused.

Morton is just as talented as Ohlie. We'll see if he can make the same kind of progress. Hanrahan's looking pretty darn good as well.

Most of the best talent from the trades is still in the minors. That's perfectly normal as usually the best prospect talent that can be gotten from trades is in AA and below. So therefore it takes about 2 years for those players to start to show up in MLB. Jose Tabata is the first of those types of players.

nosp wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 5:32 PM

daquido_bazzini  wrote:

"Ever notice how all the "pro-Nutters" come out of the wood work when an article like this gets national attention?"

What, you expect people to talk about Nutting & Co in an article about the Steelers or Penguins? Here we have an article about the baseball moves of Nutting, and you don't expect people on both sides of the fence to participate in the discussion?

Very strange. In any case, there is nothing new in this article that hasn't already been discussed. In fact, it takes the conversation backward a few steps because of half-arsed research on the part of the author. It doesn't suddenly become gospel truth simply because a national media voice speaks up. I don't know if you've noticed, but generally speaking the local P-G sports gurus and emeriti tend to know more about the local players and organizations than the national people do.

joerevs300 wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 5:55 PM

Markin, with all due respect...the Pirates have a RESPONSIBILTY not only to the fans of Pittsburgh but the taxpayers that built PNC Park to put a (read this slowly) COMPETITIVE ML FRANCHISE in PNC PARK.

The FACTS are that in the entire history of this ballpark, not ONE Pirate team has went into even AUGUST with any chance to win the division or the wild card.

The FACTS are the Pirates have received, no kidding, over $100 million in revenue sharing since PNC Park opened, and have either pocketed the majority, or spent it like fools.

You might want to see the glass half full, in that this current roster (and, as pointed out by DK this morning, figures to be the SAME roster in 2010, with a couple exceptions.  I see it as a roster that has been the worst, without question or exception, in the 2nd half of this season, and figures to make a real run at the Mets all time record for most losses in a season in 2010 as well.

Like I said, I refuse to drink the Kool Aid.  The previous ownership snookered the fans into paying for a new ballpark, and now they are taking in the profits.

As Mr. Smizik said just a couple days ago, it is COMPLETELY backwards to say "If more fans come, then we can have more payroll".

Tell me ANY OTHER franchise that operates like that.  Please.

saneman wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 6:09 PM

I dont care they got rid of all the decent players. It would be silly of the Pirates to waste money on player salaries at this point. HOWEVER, HOW MUCH MONEY HAVE THEY PUT INTO SCOUTING? To make up for the many years of losing and to accelerate their growth, they better be luring top scouts from other teams instead of overpaying for decent players. We hear vague statements that they are spending more on scouting? HOW MUCH? ANd what have they dont to improve this scouting. WOULD THEY CARE TO SHARE THE NAME OF TOP SCOUTS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT INTO THE ORGANIZATION IN THE LAST TWO YEARS?

WHat point is there in trading all the players if you have seecond rate scouting staff evaluating the players we get in return?

So I would like to see the Post Gazette do an article on scout transactions instead of player transactions.

kevin morris wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 7:02 PM

One thing in this story I disagree with-"High-revenue teams don’t appreciate revenue recipients that don’t spend the money to improve themselves but pocket it instead."

He's wrong. If teams like the Bucs actually plow their payoff into players it increases the cost of players for the haves. The Yankees, Red Sox, etc. are just fine with the Pirates taking their bribe and fielding a team of youngsters and bums.

I don't blame the author for his mistake. It is hard to be cynical enough to see this situation for what it is.

Bucco_Blues wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 7:27 PM

Frankly, Chass has encapsulated what many fans have been saying piecemeal.  The fact that a core existed and was nuked for "upside and potential" is the greatest indictment of this FO debacle.  Every baby born has the potential to be a Koufax, Einstein, Curie or Yo Yo Ma.  Even in famine registered areas the birth of a baby has an upside - it MIGHT be the one to survive.

Potential and Upside are illusions, they are unproven quantities used to provide hope, not substance.  I have the potential to make a 6-figure salary, as does every other reader of this forum.  But I do not see condo sales in the Bahamas skyrocketing based on that "potential".

This was an excellent article... Thanks, Bob!

MarkInDallas wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 7:31 PM

Joerevs said - As Mr. Smizik said just a couple days ago, it is COMPLETELY backwards to say "If more fans come, then we can have more payroll".

Tell me ANY OTHER franchise that operates like that.  Please.

----------------------------

Yes - every other franchise operates in that way. Every single one. No franchise significantly outspends their revenue on payroll in the hope that more people will come to the ballpark.

The only exception was the Arizona Diamondbacks when they first entered the league. They spent much more money than they had a ticket base to support.

Even though they won THE WORLD SERIES, their deficit spending put the team in the red so far that the majority owner was forced from the ownership group.

As much as that would make you happy, I hope you can understand why Nutting chooses not to take that path.

steelva wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 7:39 PM

Rest assured, the Yanks, Red Sox, et al, are NOT "just fine with the Pirates taking their bribe and fielding a team of youngsters and bums."   Their obvious preference would be to KEEP their hard-earned money, and have the Pirates still spend the same piddly amount of $20M per year, but out of the Pirates' own bank vault.    

joerevs300 wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 8:12 PM

So if what you say is true (that franchises will not spend money on a product if the fans aren't coming), then that means the owners and front office never have to have any accountability for a losing record.

Because we, the fans, should be selling out the stadium every night, regardless of the team's performance.

I suppose the next time a business is losing money, they should tell their investors to simply buy more stock because "they are right around the corner to turn things around".  We could have another Enron or Bernie Madoff scandal!  Wouldn't that be great?

It took a miracle for the Penguins to stay in Pittsburgh, but low and behold, they actually had a competent front office in place, and now they are selling out because they have INVESTED WISELY in keeping the core of their roster intact.

You can rest assured, the Pirates will NOT pay the players what they deserve in order to do the same.  And even when they appear to do so (with Nath McClouth) they TRADE THEM ANYWAY.

The Pirates are, without question, the worst franchise in MLB, no questions asked, from any possible measure.  

MarkInDallas wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 8:43 PM

If the Pirates did consistently spend under $25M on payroll, then yes, the league would probably not be happy. But that hasn't happened even once yet.

If it does happen next year, it would be a one time anomaly. The Pirates could easily say they are saving that money for when they have players worth keeping. As I have pointed out, it wouldn't be the first time one of the major beneficiaries of revenue sharing money has had a payroll of under $25M. As I also have pointed out, there are two very strong examples of teams that have been successful by doing just that.

MarkInDallas wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 9:00 PM

joerevs -

The Penguins are indeed a perfect example. They started selling out the games because Crosby, Malkin and Fleury were beginning to win and bringing excitement to the ice. NOT because they were highly paid.

The core players were drafted by the Penguins and were relatively low paid players in their team controlled years when the Penguins started to show signs of being a promising team. THAT is when people starting going to see the Penguins. It wasn't the other way around! The Penguins didn't spend a bunch of money on players to lure the fans in.

They drafted and developed exciting players, the people started coming, and THAT is what allowed the Penguins to bring in higher priced veteran players as important complementary pieces to the championship puzzle.

If the Penguins didn't have Crosby, Malkin and Fleury, then there's no way they could have attracted the attendance which then allowed them to spend up to the salary cap.

The Pirates are hoping Andrew McCutchen, Jose Tabata, Pedro Alvarez and some of the others in the minors form the nucleus of their own exciting young team that people can support.

Once that happens, then the Pirates will be able to spend more money to keep them, just like the Penguins.

MarkInDallas wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 9:44 PM

joerevs said...

So if what you say is true (that franchises will not spend money on a product if the fans aren't coming), then that means the owners and front office never have to have any accountability for a losing record.

----------------------------

No, not true.

It is absolutely possible to produce a winning team by having a low payroll. If the FO does their job well, then every team regardless of revenue has the resources to produce a winning team. It just takes more time to do it if you have less money because you have to wait for talent to develop in the minors.

With revenue sharing, unless a team has Montreal-like attendance (< 10K/game), every team has enough money to put together the type of team the Pirates, Marlins and Rays put together. That is, a young team which could possibly blossom into a winner reliant on strong draft picks.

The problem comes if you do produce a winning team and the people don't come out to support it, like has happened in Florida and Tampa Bay. Because that's the only way to keep most of it together.

At that point if your attendance is low, you have to trade away your players as they reach free agency, and start the cycle again.

Soon, Miami and St. Pete will have their own new ballparks, paid for with public moneys just like most every other ballpark, and then we shall see if they can indeed keep their teams together.

At that point, Oakland will be the last team to not have a new ballpark, and they will probably move to San Jose to get one.

The problem for the Pirates was that, unlike some other franchises, when the Pirates moved into PNC Park, they didn't have a very good front office. They squandered the opportunity of moving into PNC Park because they didn't draft well in the years leading up to that.

If you don't draft well, you have to have a lot more money than the Pirates will ever have in order to overcome that.

Huntington will ultimately succeed or fail on his drafts. Since the first of his draft picks will only reach the majors next year or the following, it's really unfair to give him a grade at this point. After draft picks like Alvarez, Tony Sanchez and the recent crop of high school pitchers start producing (or not) on the Pirates, then we'll see whether he's really a good judge of talent or not.

eyespy wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 9:50 PM

What's even more disconcerting to this reader is the fact that the previous ownership group looted the team to build their media empire and were never investigated and exposed by this or any other news outlet in Pittsburgh.

How else could it be that a small media group from Sacramento went from from publishing three small daily newspapers in 1990 to spending $530 million acquiring the Minneapolis Star-Tribune a mere 8 years later, then spending $4billion acquiring Knight Ridder, then the second-largest newspaper company in the country, a mere 8 years after that?

I'll tell you this: it wasn't an increase in the circulation of The Tri-City Herald of Kennewick, Washington or The Island Packet of Hilton Head, South Carolina.

en.wikipedia.org/.../Mcclatchy

Read the company's history for yourself. It's all there; black, white and unread all over.

The destruction of the Pittsburgh Baseball Club to finance the massive explosion of the McClatchy Company remains one of the great untold stories in Pittsburgh history, and it is to their eternal shame that this story goes unreported by the current Pittsburgh media.

joerevs300 wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 10:00 PM

"Huntington will ultimately succeed or fail on his drafts. Since the first of his draft picks will only reach the majors next year or the following, it's really unfair to give him a grade at this point. After draft picks like Alvarez, Tony Sanchez and the recent crop of high school pitchers start producing (or not) on the Pirates, then we'll see whether he's really a good judge of talent or not."

So then, we'll be at 20 consecutive losing seasons and then say "oops, I guess we need to try again?"

Wow.  I have never seen a fan base with more patience then the eternal hope a lot of Pirate fans have.

joerevs300 wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Thu, Sep 17 2009 10:04 PM

"The Pirates are hoping Andrew McCutchen, Jose Tabata, Pedro Alvarez and some of the others in the minors form the nucleus of their own exciting young team that people can support.

Once that happens, then the Pirates will be able to spend more money to keep them, just like the Penguins."

One major difference:  The Penguins are WINNING.

There has been nothing at all, to this point, to show that this "nucleus" of the Pirates can win.  Baseball's a lot more dynamic than hockey, in that you have to have both a deep pitching staff and a balanced offense to win consistantly.

I simply cannot wait until this team loses 110 games next year and we're still talking that the trades that Huntington made "are still too early to see the result".

I can say this:  The Jason Bay trade is an absolute failure, and has been reported as such by DK and any other notable baseball writer (Buster Olney and Keith Law to name 2).  We need no longer wait on that one.

And it's only a matter of time before the others end up showing the same way, or at best a wash.

And the Pirates can ill afford to simply "wash" in a trade.  They must get first line talent in return, period.  Otherwise they have no chance because not only do we know they won't draft the best player, but they won't pay them either.

PaulH wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 12:40 AM

First of all, I must say that people who post here repeatedly within one Bob Smizik post are ruining this Blog!   If you can't say what you have to say in ONE POST, then too bad.  Please don't clutter it up with post on top of post.  This isn't a chat room operation.  It's no fun reading down, only to see people posting and reposting and reposting like a bunch of 2nd graders who can't think of everything they want to say the first time.

This article by Chass is excellent.  It displays the naked cheapness of the Nutting regime, a cheapness that is apparently not being questioned by MLB?  Getting 40 million?   Think of what could be done with that to put this team into contention either now or in the near future!

But, likely nothing will happen to change the Pirates hopeless ownership situation.   Because.........

1) Bob Nutting wants fans to come out and support this minor league team at PNC Park so he can spend more on better players.  That's putting the cart before the horse!

2) The team currently playing in Pittsburgh is the worst in the major leagues.  It likely won't get any better.

3) There's really no hope in the minor leagues outside Pedro Alverez and Jose Tabata.   There are some other long shots, but that's all they are - long shots to be big time MLB stars.

4) This much ballyhooed management team of Coonelly and Huntington is scary.  They call Milledge a five tool player but he doesn't even possess one tool!   How many more judgments such as this have they blundered on?

5) What was wrong with a "small ball" outfield of Morgan, McCutcheon  and McClouth?    Backed by an infield defense of the two LaRoches, Sanchez and Wilson, the Pirates could have been competitive with great defense and a rat-a-tat offense.  But no, we have to get rid of expensive players for Bob Nutting!

pipecock wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 1:41 AM

i think i must be hallucinating. one guy says we should trade for Barry Zito. we have another guy who thinks a "rat-a-tat offense" of our previous lineup plus andrew mccutcheon suddenly takes a many-games-below-.500 team and turns it into a contender. and the people who think that actually blowing that crap up and trying to build from the base up are the people drinking the Kool-Aid?!?! well whatever you guys are having, i'll gladly take some if it means this craziness with suddenly make sense.

kevin morris wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 8:30 AM

"Rest assured, the Yanks, Red Sox, et al, are NOT "just fine with the Pirates taking their bribe and fielding a team of youngsters and bums."   Their obvious preference would be to KEEP their hard-earned money, and have the Pirates still spend the same piddly amount of $20M per year, but out of the Pirates' own bank vault."

Of course, steelva, nobody wants to pay the help, but the bribe is what the top tier teams pay the bottom level teams to avoid any efforts to make the league operate competitively. You know, like getting a salary structure/cap like every other sport?    

steelva wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 10:15 AM

I'm well aware of the absence of a sal cap in MLB.

The challenge in MLB is the disparity in LOCAL television and radio revenues.   What the Pirates get pales in comparison to what the Cubs, Yanks, Braves, etc, get, from local TV and radio.     These clubs feel they have individually EARNED  those revenues and aren't all that happy about sharing them with the dregs of the league.....especially dregs that HOARD the money rather than spending it.   The other 3 major sports have large NATIONAL television contracts (not so large in the NHL, but they do have one) in which they split the pie up evenly among all teams.   MLB has a tiny national contract and the disparity is in the LOCAL contracts.   I don't have the easy answer on how to address that.   I like the idea of the sal cap, but MLB leadership, led by the incompetent Bud Selig, is no match for the MLB players union.  

kevin morris wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 10:50 AM

Steelva, the fact that there is a huge disparity in income doesn't preclude a salary cap, and in fact makes one more necessary if you think about it. The Pirates and the other lower income teams have sold out to the big spenders, and they have all wussed out in dealing with the player's union. The NHL showed the way, but as long as the Bucs are able to make a nice profit every year they aren't going to rock the boat just so there can be some fairness to the sport.

I sometimes wonder why New York, Boston, etc. don't support a salary cap. They would greatly increase their profits as long as they continued to field a competitive team.

steelva wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 10:56 AM

I understand the huge disparity in revenues does not preclude a sal sap.   And I already stated that I like the idea of a sal cap.   It would help level the playing field.    If it could be done tomorrow, heck, I'd mail 50 bucks myself to help pay for the paperwork and xerox fees and so on.  

The biggest obstacle to a sal cap is LEADERSHIP......and MLB has none.    Until the idiot Selig steps down, quits, or is removed, there is no hope of a sal cap in MLB.  

chilco99 wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 11:04 AM

Like I've said before..... it won't be long until the Bucco's are on a twin prop plane with duct tape holding the propellers together. Whilst Bob Nutting is hiking the Applachian Trail with a butterfly net, On Waldon Pond in his napsack, and a spanking new pair of spectacles from mom and dad.

FriendsOfMarioFan wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 1:38 PM

I reiterate this over and over again!  The Luxury Tax is the WORST thing that could have happened to Pirate fans.  The absolute WORST thing.  It gives the Nuttings a license to steal!

Think about the reasons why it is the worst.

1) It acts as some sort of a defacto Salary Cap, only with not only NO FLOOR, but the teams unwilling to spend get the "Luxury Tax" money, so it behooves them to not spend upwards of $75 million.   Why spend more and lose this revenue stream?

2) It is a nice way for teams like the Yankees to essentially buy off some competition.  With ownership like the Nuttings, the tax basically eliminates them from being competitive because it keeps them from spending money.

3) This maybe the worst thing.  Why would you sell this franchise?  If you reap $40 million and your payroll is $20 million, you don't have to sell many tickets to make alot of money, and spend a little on fireworks and other trinkets to placate the fans.

As long as this exists without provisions that it goes directly into the MLB roster payroll.....we are doomed!

 

(Just to correct an common mistake, the money the Pirates receive from MLB is through revenue sharing, not the luxury tax. -- Bob Smizik)

Teke's_Sunglasses wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 6:26 PM

What happened to my comment that this was a terrible article?

(If that's all you had said it would still be up.  There was no need for the character assasnation you displayed. Chass is an honored journalist. -- Bob Smizik)

clint wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Fri, Sep 18 2009 9:38 PM

The economics of baseball is a mess, and there's no reason to think that the Pirates will ever be consistently competitive as long as the structure stays the same. One or two competitive seasons out of 17 or more, however, would not be asking too much. As for the economics of baseball: according to one of the 'great' Pirates I can remember from my childhood --I'm 29, and there haven't been (m)any others since then -- there may be peace in the Middle East before we see a consistently competitive Pirates team.

Compared to the Steelers and Penguins, the Pirates are a joke for the City's reputation in professional sports. Anyone who disagrees is just being provincial.

Retire#21 wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Sat, Sep 19 2009 8:45 AM

It is quite obvious that the Pirates were not a winning team at the time the trades began to take place.  While some of the players the Pirates have traded have experienced great success since leaving Pittsburgh (Laroche, Morgan for example) they were not experiencing the same level of success here.  Trading those players, while part of the issue, is not necessarily the entirety of the annoyance.  What they got in return for those players is.  You cannot replace mediocre talent in a trade by acquiring players who are a downgrade, and then call that rebuilding.  Milledge is not an improvement over Morgan.  Moss is not an improvement over Bay.  Laroche at 3rd hits for less power than his predecessor.  Does anybody think that the bullpen or middle infield is better now than it was before?  That we were bad with those guys does not justify trading them for talent that has actually downgraded the team further.  If you are going to trade veterans, at least trade them for youth which can actually PLAY.   And therin lies the basis of the annoyance.  It it one thing to be cheap, it is another to be cheap and incompetent.

Bob Smizik's Blog wrote Letters: Faneca no Woodson
on Sat, Sep 19 2009 8:49 AM

Saturday, 1 a.m. Q: One thing I don't think too many pundits have brought up is any correlation between

Teke's_Sunglasses wrote re: ``An embarrassment to Pittsburgh''
on Mon, Sep 28 2009 9:48 PM

I didnt display nothin'. I just think a respectable journalist should check facts and represent both sides, and any employer of said journalist has low standards. Then again, it is known that in the past NYT  writers have been charged with plagiarizing and creating stories, although not this writer specifically.

 

(You attacked Chass' character without showing in any way how his fact were wrong. -- Bob Smizik)