Buster Olney, the sage of the "as told to" and doubter of all things WAR, has stepped aside from relaunching the productive outs crusade to share a philosophical musing of great import:
KC Royals C Salvador Perez has a ton of presence, similar to what Sandy Alomar had. Seems like a natural leader.
Talking about Sal Perez's "presence" Olney raises tantalizing questions about presence itself and of course about absence. By understanding Perez's presence we can only consider the implications of his absence and how that binary infuses our understanding of desire. Royal opponents are defined by the lack of Perez, but so too is the viewer. Save, I suppose, Olney himself, who is at once deeply aware of Perez's being but also, we must assume, understanding of some deeper awareness of emptiness. An emptiness made visible in the shadow of Perez's light. In this regard, Olney emerges as a seer vatic.
Moreover, coming at the issue from Barthes via Benjamin, what do we make of the simulacra of Perez that dominate our actual experience of him? We are well aware of his presence somewhere, on the green fields of material existence, but our exposure to him is fundamentally mediated. He is, as it were, illuminated. Present, but absent all the same. In this way, we must credit Olney for illustrating a profound instance of differance. This paradigmatic instability is inscribed on Perez's body, unsettling Royal opponents.
Naturally, one would expect Olney to refer to Perez's aura, and in this case he certainly does. Though interesting, his aura is in this instance entirely a referent: it carries the associations of the real wholly and is not an aftereffect of what we experience as the viewer. Perez's aura, here at least, is limited to those interacting with him in the real. In this way, his essence is not finally that of an art object, but as an untranslatable chora of the real.
Ontologically then, Olney rejects monism because Perez is singular, luminously present, defined against pale imitations. Extended out, this vision of being, as defined and instantiated by Perez, becomes radiantly variegated, though also terrifying in its dimensions.
17 recs | 164 comments
WOW
I am going to spend the rest of the day trying to wrap my mind around this.
meat525 - January 31, 2012
Yes
bas - January 31, 2012
Um, bravo.
labbadabba - January 31, 2012
Mind
blown
mitchfreakingmaier! - January 31, 2012
In reviewing the Royals, we have achieved tranquility.
Yamfun Cheng Kamfun - January 31, 2012
The pale blue ether drifts away and we are left with the darkness of starlight.
JKWard - January 31, 2012 via mobile
So how far do you have to be from him to be drawn into his presence.
Is it just seeing him as on TV? Do you have to see him live? Does the presence extend beyond the ball park or is it confined to just the yahoos wearing the same uniform? Or maybe he just has a 12" shlong?
Jeff Zimmerman - January 31, 2012
Can presence even be mediated?
Or can we only experience, via the TV image, the absence of presence?
bas - January 31, 2012
The real question: does Olney follow Lacan in purest form, or is he into the more derivitive lack authors like zizek?
trusttheprocess - January 31, 2012 via mobile
Pffffft
What is up with all this psychological mumbo-jumbo, I wanna talk about Beisball.
ChiefWildcat - January 31, 2012
This article has made me a man
tiquanunderwear - January 31, 2012
Welcome tiquan
I think you’re gonna like it.
Rufus R. Jones - January 31, 2012
I wish my name in real life was tiquan
tiquanunderwear - January 31, 2012
This isn't real life?
Shit.
Rufus R. Jones - January 31, 2012
I wish my last name in real life was Underwear.
Clusterfuknutz has never worked for me.
setupunchtag - February 1, 2012
inscribed on the body
Freneau - January 31, 2012
Chinese tattoo
I think it says “love is for the soul” But it actually says “you have a small penis” No one will know the difference
tiquanunderwear - January 31, 2012
At Least It
Doesn’t say “I have a small penis”.
philofthenorth - January 31, 2012
There is a black kid at my school
The only thing I’ve heard him say all year is “man I got a big dick”
tiquanunderwear - February 1, 2012
Do you have reason to question him? If you were in MO, it is the show-me state.
Rufus R. Jones - February 2, 2012
Taking a brief sidestep from the more important philosophical issues
I like Salvador Perez, even though I’m not as convinced as some about how good he’s going to be or how quickly he will achieve it. He seems like a fun, likeable player in the very least. But I really don’t want to have to hear and read over the next six years about his magical presence, leadership, grit, moxie, fire in the belly. I don’t want to have to hear that his mere existence makes the players around him better. I don’t want to be burdened with the schlock that his tremendous game calling abilities shave half a run off of the ERA of every Royals pitcher (both current, historical and in the future).
Why can’t we let players just be players? Why do we have to turn some of them into mystical, magical players who are imbued with the pure spirit of competition, excellence and winning?
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
Rudy! Rudy! Ruuudy!
dejackso - January 31, 2012
We all know this is nonsense
But can’t we, just this once, bask in the moment where a member of the national media actually bothered to talk about a Royals player and managed to say something positive while doing it? Even if that particular member of the media is known to be an idiot and a sycophant who looks a little like a stuffed animal that has been run through the wash and may or may not be a pedophile?
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
Yeah, it must have been 2 or 3 days since Olney talked to someone about a ten-year deal for Eric Hosmer
so biased
Matt Klaassen - January 31, 2012
Just for clarity sake
my original comment wasn’t remotely serious
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
I would be happy to bask thusly if Olney had praised Perez’s hitting, fielding, pitch framing or something like that. I even would have preferred some talk of his game calling, rather than his “presence.”
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
It's like someone saying your girlfriend has a great personality
You want people to say she’s smoking hot.
thelaundry - January 31, 2012
quit looking at my GF
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
Olney also tweeted that your girlfriend has a ton of presence
spamiam79 - January 31, 2012 via Android app
quit paying attention to my GF's great personality
SagehenMacGyver47 - February 1, 2012
and boy can she cook
buddyball - February 1, 2012
And It Shows
philofthenorth - February 1, 2012
great little housekeeper
buddyball - February 1, 2012
That brings up an interesting point
When people talk about professional athletes having magical, mystical, intangibles qualities, most people see it as perfectly reasonable. But can you imagine describing a co-worker or friend like that?
Bob: Hey Joe, did you fill that vacancy in accounting?
Joe: Yeah, you have to meet this guy. He’s something special.
Bob: Oh yeah? He’s a CPA with lots of great experience and went to a great school?
Joe: Never mind that, he has tremendous presence. He’s a natural leader.
Bob: Yeah, but he’s an accoutant. Aren’t his abilities as an accountant what’s important?
Joe: Did you hear what I just said? He has like a ton of presence. He’s a tremendous leader.
Bob: Joe, did you know that our health plan pays for 25 visits to a mental health care provider?
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
Not to just turn this into politics, but people do the same things with candidates
Bob: Hey Joe, who are you looking to vote for?
Joe: I watched tv the other day and this good looking guy said a lot of things I agree with.
Bob: Are they qualified? Have they successfully run from an executive position a complex beuracratic agency or corporation?
Joe: They have a a great presence. A lot of people look up to them and want to follow them. They aren’t a 1% corporate tool either.
Bob: Okay, so have they been involved in high level politics? Maybe spent a decade as an influential legislature with a number of important pieces of successful legislation that they put together. Or do they have a military background. Maybe they moved up the ranks becoming a general or high level liaison to NATO. Have they worked in the state department? Where they a judge? Do they have any experience that would prepare them to be a powerful and important person in the world?
Joe: People like him and are willing to vote for him!
Chyladin - January 31, 2012
I would much rather have a beer with Salvador Perez!
RoyalsRetro - January 31, 2012
The thing is, we do often do this
I mean once you have the requisite qualifications (which Frenchy and Sal essentially have), it seems like offices generally try to hire people that they get along with or that have intangibles like drive or whatever.
RoyalsRetro - January 31, 2012
I guess, if you know before hiring someone that you get along with them or feel like you know their intangibles. But generally I don’t think that’s the case. Generally the person you hire is a relative stranger (perhaps referred by someone you know). Certainly how they come accross in an interview is important, but I don’t think people usually believe they are hiring based on intangibles. I think they usually think it is about the qualificaitons.
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
But you already know their qualifications if you bring them in for an interview
The job interview is essentially to gauge “intangibles”
RoyalsRetro - January 31, 2012
I'm also not arguing this is a wise thing to do
I was reading a book recently that said something to the effect that HR directors are pretty much engaging in a crapshoot whenever they hire someone, that once you get to a certain set of qualifications, you could pick names out of a hat and do as well as firms do at hiring.
RoyalsRetro - January 31, 2012
But no one is going to hire someone based strictly off of a resume. You have to bring someone in and talk to them. Interviews are mandatory. But I really think the hiring decision is usually made off of the qualifications, unless many have the same qualifications (which is not uncommon). Then you have to have tie breakers. And these tie breakers aren’t necessarily all meaningless intangibles. In an interview, you can see if the person has good oral communications sills. That can certainly be job relevant.
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
helps if they have good writing sills, too
marbotty - February 1, 2012
Oh job interviews.
I have a friend who got a job at a big firm essentially because he was able to “shoot the shit” with the person interviewing him.
hawkinscm87 - January 31, 2012
He is qualified, but far from the only one.
hawkinscm87 - January 31, 2012
While I'm not exactly a "professional,"
nearly every job I have ever gotten has been because I knew someone there.
Old Man Duggan - February 1, 2012
That actually becomes more common the more "professional" you become
Sweep_the_Leg - February 1, 2012
Can't we just play pretend that presence means all those things?
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
We can try
I’ve tried to pretend that Dayton Moore’s incompetence was actually competence, but that didn’t work out so well.
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
My rather narrow view of DM is that he is simply inconsistent
It’s probably an indication that he is simply mediocre at best as a GM but I choose to pretend it’s part of some growth cycle or learning curve or whatever that’s right on the brink of being becoming greatness.
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
presence means everything
Freneau - January 31, 2012
And nothing
at the same time
RoyalsRetro - January 31, 2012
It Is The
Absence of absence.
philofthenorth - January 31, 2012
That was deep.
Yodazilla - February 1, 2012
This was a tweet!
An off-hand comment. All of the other stuff in these comments is being filled in by people’s imaginations.
Perez has ‘presence’. i’m familiar with this characteristic. It’s not determinative but it’s not inconsequential.
I suppose Buster could limit his tweets to defensible arguments, but that’s a pretty high bar for such a disposable medium.
billexgordler - January 31, 2012
It’s consequential? What in the world does it even mean? Talk about a vague, non-sports term. It’s like saying he has “spirit.” As it can mean anything, that must be consequential too!
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
OED Shorter
5. Demeanour, carriage, esp. when stately or impressive.
Too vague?
Buster’s not implying that Perez’s demeanor and carriage will make him a good baseball player. He’s simply saying that he is impressive. You don’t care. Fine. But that doesn’t mean that it’s imprecise or inconsequential.
billexgordler - February 1, 2012
Are you really asking if that is too vague to be meaningful?
That he’s very stately? That he has a great demeanour or carriage? It’s so vague and nebulous as to be laughable.
Are you kidding? It’s not imprecise? Wow, really?
Scott McKinney - February 1, 2012
I feel the same way about moustakas. He could end up being legitimately good but I’ll get annoyed by the narrative. I also see him being overrated as a real possibility. No walks, bad defense, lots of RBIs and leadership.
But, if we go from having the leadership of a terrible kendall to the leadership of an overrated but legitimately good moustakas, I’ll certainly taker that as an upgrade.
trusttheprocess - January 31, 2012 via mobile
Do they talk about Moustakas's leadership and other intangibles a lot?
I’m not saying they don’t, but other than the “taught a little girl math at the Cheesecake Factory” story, I can’t remember anything.
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
it's come up from day one
his leadership, attitude, makeup, competitiveness, etc. Yup. Frankly, it’s one thing to talk about guys like Giavotella like that, but for a #2 pick who is supposed to be a superstar, I’d rather hear about, you know, him learning the strike zone or playing defense rather than “boy he’s just a great kid that everyone loves and user was awesome for that half-season in AA.”
Matt Klaassen - January 31, 2012
user=sure
or maybe it’s just a new nickname for Moose
Or maybe I meant “usher,” another prospect who really likes that artist.
Matt Klaassen - January 31, 2012
In all fairness
We’ve heard the narative about his work ethic applied to working on his D as well.
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
right
and I’m glad. I’d just rather hear that he was actually good at defense.
Matt Klaassen - January 31, 2012
I doubt we'll be hearing that any time soon
On the bright side, we can always just compare his D to the atrocity that is to be Miggy Cabrera’s 3B D.
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
He has a ton of presence at third base though
And Prince Fielder literally has a ton of presence at first base. (rimshot)
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
I'd Be Happy
With average defense if he comes close to fulfilling his promise at the plate.
philofthenorth - January 31, 2012
Not really worried about Moose
I’m skeptical of his “star potential,” but even if he’s just “passable” at third, I think he’ll hit enough to at least be around an average player. Given his profile (not many walks, good ability to make contact), even at his best he strikes me as the kind of guy who is going to be really streaky, which is neither good nor bad, really. But those kinds of guys tend to elate/frustrate in equal measure over the course of a season.
Matt Klaassen - January 31, 2012
HILLENBRAND!!!!! (with more power)
billexgordler - January 31, 2012
Or His B-R
Comparable Moose Solters!
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/soltemo01.shtml
philofthenorth - January 31, 2012
heh
although I think there’s a noticeable gap between being “passable” at third and being “Hillenbrand.”
Matt Klaassen - February 1, 2012
we'd all rather hear that he was Albert Pujols
But he’s not. But that he has a great work ethic, attitude, and other ineffable stuff that provokes defensive derision here (not singling you out Matt) is a great supplement to his considerable skills. Work ethic matters, even for #2 picks.
billexgordler - January 31, 2012
But shouldn’t we be skeptical of the subjective opinions about ineffable qualities of a prospect? Not too get too deep into the language here, but “ineffable” means that something is too great to be described by words. So if it is beyond description, should we think it should be easily identified and measured (at least in comparison to others)? Yes, work ethic matters. But should we just assume that his work ethic has been accurately identified and measured, and honestly described, despite the huge inherent difficulty in identifying and measuring those intangibles?
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
...
Work ethic is not ineffable, neither is attitude. But objective descriptions of either quality generally make for Leviticus-grade boring copy. Presence, while it can be defined (see above), is ineffable, because it must be experienced.
But here we’re getting back to this hyper-doubt that I just can’t fathom. Work ethic and attitude are among the easiest characteristics for organizations (baseball or otherwise) to identify. I choose not to doubt them because I feel comfortable making those same assessments every day in my professional life.
billexgordler - February 1, 2012
I was just following along with what you said: “he has a great work ethic, attitude, and other ineffable stuff .”
And the subjective descriptions are pretty worthless. If you’re saying writers share this stuff because it’s more interesting and exciting reading, I’m sure that’s true. But I’m dealing with the actual value of those words and concepts, which is close to nill.
How easy they are to reliably identify is questionable (especially attitude), but certainly moreso than leadership, grit, heart, spirit, moxy and presence. And it is those intangibles which get the most attention from sports media, coaches, etc. What say you about the difficulty with identifying and measuring those ineffable qualities?
Scott McKinney - February 1, 2012
i dont think its that difficult to determine a guys work ethic...
when you’re around them all the time like the royals people are
billybeingbilly - February 1, 2012
I guess what gets me
is that we never hear anything comparable about Eric Hosmer’s worth ethic, or “want to” or leadership or anything. Obviously, I’m not around these guys at all and stuff like t hat, but since we (well, at least “I”) was talking about my own visceral response to this stuff, I am guessing that is not because Eric Hosmer does not work hard (losing track of all my negatives/positives) and stuff — I am sure he does, any pro athlete has to. I am guessing his work ethic is tremendous. But my feeling is that with Hosmer, beginning in 2010, there was so much other stuff to talk about that no one needed to bother to talk up his intangibles. That’s my experience in reading about most top prospects. So when one of the first things that gets brought up with Moustakas is his intangibles, it makes me wonder…
Matt Klaassen - February 1, 2012
Sort of like how
people only talk about a girl’s personality when they can’t find anything nice to say about her looks.
cmkeller - February 1, 2012
Blast
I didn’t realize that someone up-thread had used this analogy.
cmkeller - February 1, 2012
I've heard comments on the broadcasts that he's viewed as
the leader of this wave of young players. Not sure how much of that is related to anything in his personality and how much is related to him being a little bit older and farther along in the system. (Before Hos passed him)
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
Remember that time he threw Jason Taylor (or whatever that guy's name was)
up against the locker? And a scout said “That’s how you build a team.”
Lots of stuff like that.
Matt Klaassen - January 31, 2012
Wait, was that real?
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
I think so.
If it’s not, I’ll have to go back to believing in Santa Claus.
Dadunca - January 31, 2012
I wish I could dig it up
I need to start keeping a log of quotes and links that come by way of anonymous scouts and rival club executives for times like this.
Matt Klaassen - January 31, 2012
There was also the time he fought another player and bumped an umpire
when Johnny G. was spiked on a double play.
Dadunca - January 31, 2012
another one
would be from the scout who in mid-2008 that the Royals would be better off with Greinke in the bullpen.
Matt Klaassen - January 31, 2012
Mid 2008?
He was kinda having a good season in 2008, no?
NotAHippie - February 1, 2012
yeah, that's what made it so funny
it would have sort of made sense in 2007, or even right at the beginning of 2008 ,but by mid-2008 it was really clear that he was going to be just fine as a starter, at least above-average, maybe the ace people had expected him to be.
Matt Klaassen - February 1, 2012
I def remember misty eyed tales of Moose standing up to older boys
giving the red ass about something….if that isn’t specific enough for you, I can’t help you.
Nighthawk at the Diner - February 1, 2012
Can't wait for him to stuff Getz into a locker
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
Swirly Or GTFO!
philofthenorth - January 31, 2012
Atomic Wedgie
then hang him by his waistband on the hook next to his locker.
Sweep_the_Leg - January 31, 2012
...Indian burn?
Or noogie?
Yodazilla - February 1, 2012
Well then
It looks like we’re gonna need to find out how to say “Rewind Yourself” in Spanish.
CentralChamps20?? - January 31, 2012 via mobile
Rebobínate
pronounced “rey-bow-BEAN-ah-tay.”
Juancho - January 31, 2012
he supposedly threw a teammate against the lockers or something after a loss or string of losses that said teammate wasnt taking hard enough
billybeingbilly - February 1, 2012
The narrative on Moustakas, I thought
Was that he will hit a lot of home runs.
hawkinscm87 - January 31, 2012
And it's only going to get worse
Dayton publicly talks about building a family, not just a team. The media has already fed into it (just saw a segment on MLBN the other day about the Royals’ clubhouse culture). Many “baseball people”, in between the Crash Davis cliches, love to talk about chemistry and intangibles and their supposed importance.
For some reason, it’s boring to say the Royals are expected to improve and eventually win because they have committed to acquiring and developing young talent, and that talented players win more games than less talented or fading players. There just has to be more to it, and the Royals will be more than happy to play that up.
thelaundry - January 31, 2012
I wonder when Dayton’s commitment to build a family in the clubhouse started. And does he really believe that. Because it doesn’t seem like he was all that committed to it when he tried to trade for Milton Bradley or when he acquired Jose Guillen, Miguel Olivo or Roman Colon. Is the “family” stuff just some PR spin that Moore trowels out when he’s trying to publicly sell an acquisition like Jeff Francoeur? Or does he really believe that shit? And if he does, was he just ignorant of the cancerous nature of guys like Bradley and Guillen? Or were those mistakes back when he was a green GM and now he’s learned what really makes a player a good clubhouse guy?
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
I think he believes a guy like Francoeur
Casts a radiant glow that overshadows a few bad clubhouse apples. I think he knows very well a few mercenaries will be need to be added to the fruits of the Process, and those guys (maybe even some of the handpicked prospects) won’t be great guys. It’s clear he’s not been afraid to bring in a surly, even cancerous, player (Bradley is the prime example, even more so than Guillen).
How much of a motivation was Greinke’s grumbling/behavior in his being traded? It was said at the time it forced Dayton’s hand. I don’t think Dayton buys into the intangibles completely, but more than I’d like.
thelaundry - January 31, 2012
I agree
It’s better PR and a more fun conversation for him to have that Frenchy is a great guy than a story about how Paulino is kind of a douche.
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
I have no problem with talented jerks
Clemens, even pre-cheating? A-hole. Supposedly Randy Johnson’s wife knew not to speak to him on the days he started.
Good guys make it easier for the media, but I don’t care about that. I would much rather read that a guy is scary and unpleasant to reporters AND his opponents.
thelaundry - January 31, 2012
For any team
I think it is important when it is convenient. When it is not convenient, it is not as important.
Rufus R. Jones - January 31, 2012
I think a player like Guillen
would change anyone’s mind as to what the culture should be in the clubhouse.
ChiefWildcat - January 31, 2012
MLB 11 The Show
While simulating a few games the computer decided my 52-30 Royals needed to sign Guillen while Jesus was hurt.
I cut Guillen as soon as I saw what had happened, but by the end of the day, I had to start a who new season. It was tainted and I just felt dirty.
MVP-Gordon - January 31, 2012
Haven't we heard both tho?
There have been stories about how talented all these young guys are. Shouldn’t we expect a certain ammount of nonsense to be reported when news, even sports news, is now a 24 hour per day obsession?
KC_Satchmo - January 31, 2012
I wanna know about his
bat control and why can't he just get rid of the batting glovesmitchfreakingmaier! - January 31, 2012
and what is the arm tat situation?
buddyball - January 31, 2012
Scott, that's the fun part
Anyone can just figure out statistics and know that a lousy FIP portends a poor pitching performance next year. Most fans figure that jocks are heroes and are imbued with supernatural powers. The fan focus is to figure which of the jocks are worth rooting for (good players with good attitudes) and which are not. Wanting to compete and be excellent and win is the whole point of sports, and we like to think that some athletes are better than others, not just at hitting or pitching or fielding, but also at winning.
I’ve always thought that us sports fans are just like women and their celebrity magazines. We can quote Miguel Cabrera’s WAR while they know how many times each Kardashian has been married.
Juancho - January 31, 2012
I guess I’m just not a fan of magical thinking.
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
Yeah, me neither
but I bet most fans think that way, especially football fans. “Big-time players make the big plays!!!!” over and over on every American football broadcast. No, good players are more likely to make good plays, and “goodness” is something that we can try to measure, but that’s not something you can tell Joe Morgan, greatest second baseman ever.
In Little League I used to flap my arm like Morgan did in order to make sure my elbow was up. That’s how good he was. Everyone knew him. Two consecutive MVPs. Four tools, fielding, running, hitting for average, and hitting for power. Once drove in like 125 runs (agreed, batting third for the Big Red Machine is a good way to get RBIs), which must be a record for guys under 5’ 8’’. Once stole like 60 bases, and hit like 27 HR the same year.
Morgan seems like a good guy, too. He’s contributed so much to his hometown community in Oakland that they named a street after him. He went back to college and got his degree to serve as an example for the kids.
It’s just a shame he’s such an awful announcer.
Juancho - January 31, 2012
the other problem is there's no middle ground in analysis
seemingly every player is either a choker who doesn’t know how to win or one of the greatest of all time
Freneau - January 31, 2012
Not sure I agree
Most jocks are heroized by announcers and the media. Hell, look at the way poor players like Getz and Kendall, and average players like Francoeur, are treated by the media. This may not be true on the East Coast, but it is everywhere else.
True, the few jocks who are not heroized are generally demonized, especially in American football, which is getting uncomfortably close to pro wrestling.
Juancho - January 31, 2012
how about the treatment of lebron?
billybeingbilly - February 1, 2012
He was treated like a saint until "the decision" fiasco.
Warden11 - February 1, 2012
Not a big fan of LeBron the Image (obviously he's a great player)
but I don’t think he was treated as a “saint” prior to leaving Cleveland.
Matt Klaassen - February 1, 2012
Maybe "saint" is too far.
But the media gave him everything he could have asked for prior to “the decision”. Sure there were questions about some of his performances but the fact that his decision was showcased like it was shows just how much of a hero ESPN wanted him to be.
Warden11 - February 1, 2012
Good article at theclassical.org exploring the sensation that is LeBron
Orson Wells is his main comp IIRC
Nighthawk at the Diner - February 1, 2012
Is the media narrative
Fortunately this has been watered down as the MSM is less and less important.
RoyalsRetro - January 31, 2012
The MSM controls access to the NFL
and has that locked down. That’s why football is the most hyped sport; it’s one of the few things they have left. They also control big-time college football. Most Royals games don’t get any more media attention than the two teams’ hometown radio and television announcers.
Juancho - January 31, 2012
I think some sports fans wouldn't be sports fans without all the human interest stuff.
There’s great stories and great experiences, which I think are different. They aren’t made up. But sportswriters have been framing the perception of players for a long time by doing this kind of thing. Just looking at a player who is a big dude and then making a ridiculous statement about leadership and Perezesence.
hawkinscm87 - January 31, 2012
um
Because they’re not just players. They’re people. People with qualities like resilience, leadership, charisma, determination, etc. Which qualities can have significant effects on a player’s and team’s development and performance.
We’ve reached some Jamesian end game here, it seems like. Bill James was obsessed with proof and abhorred cant. This attitude spurred tremendous advances in the way we understand the game. But now we’re seeking proof for even the most benign commentary on a player’s personality. If a group of people reaches consensus that one of its members a leader this is evidence/proof that that person is a leader.
Maybe you don’t care who the team’s leaders are, or maybe you think that the team leaders should be determined by WAR rather than rough consensus. If you’re the former, then you’re a peculiar kind of post-Jamesian fan who’s conflated distance, neutrality and reason into a numb facsimile of fan-dom; if the latter then you’d just rather this article be written about Alex Gordon.
I for one choose not to be offended by reporting of this type. I think it provides a unique insight into what it’s like to play on the Royals.
billexgordler - January 31, 2012
And the concept of “player” includes “person.”
And here’s the problem, those things are unknown and unknowable. Some people in and around the game pretend that they know the unknown and unknowable. How good is Player X’s leadership? Who the hell knows? A manager will know something about his player’s leadership. But there is much he doesn’t know. I’m sure a given player’s leadership affects some players positively. But it may also affect others negatively. And yet they (managers, GM’s, players, writers, broadcasters) pretend to have a clear idea of who is a good leader, or has grit, or fire, or charisma, etc. and how valuable that is.
I think it provides the lamest kind of guesswork that shouldn’t be taken seriously. It is more than worthy of contempt and ridicule, especially when it goes beyond the standard intangibles (like leadership) to the even more undefinable and meaningless (presence).
Scott McKinney - January 31, 2012
classic response
leadership? what’s a leader? charisma? who’s she?
if you’re arguing that we don’t understand the effects of these characteristics, have at it. i’ve never argued otherwise and i won’t here. if you’re arguing that these are characteristics that humans can’t reliably recognize then i think you’re wrong.
these words exist because they mean something. i guess buster olney’s not enough of an authority on social interaction for you.
billexgordler - February 1, 2012
I have long had a Charisma Carpenter crush
RoyalsRetro - February 1, 2012
she was on two Joss Whedon shows
nerds will be talking about her as if she is Meryl Streep for the next 100 years
Matt Klaassen - February 1, 2012
And she did a spread in Playboy
which only endears her more.
Old Man Duggan - February 1, 2012
That’s a pretty big argument for you to just punt. If we don’t know how a given player’s leadership, charisma, etc. affect his teammates (when the value of these characteristics is that they supposedly help others and make the team better), then we have no idea what value, if any, those intangibles have.
Yes, those words mean something. But I’m sure you will agree that some words are very, very vague with somewhat different meanings to different people. And vague, nebulous qualities are often difficult to indentify in a person. You are pretending that the questions “what is leadership?” and “who has is a leader?” are easy questions to answer. I think that’s ludicrous.
Scott McKinney - February 1, 2012
I'm just going to assume that you are excepting Hosmer from this complaint,
as his being the Messiah is both truth and provable.
Old Man Duggan - February 1, 2012
Deities are always excepted
Scott McKinney - February 1, 2012
Phew.
I didn’t want to have to get into a protracted debate about this.
Old Man Duggan - February 1, 2012
:(
I did.
Scott McKinney - February 1, 2012
I don't get it
johnny4 - January 31, 2012
Almost flagged for lack of Husserl
Matt Klaassen - January 31, 2012
His role this year is one of both hector and helper, naysayer and nexus. Around his circumference lies the full measure of the game.
http://snltranscripts.jt.org/89/89qsportsmachine.phtml
RoyalsRetro - January 31, 2012
I will go so far as to say that Salvador's effect on the team...nay, the entire metaphysical plane
justifies the creation of a new term that can only make a feeble attempt to encapsulate his meaning to the rest of the world:
PEREZENCE
Sweep_the_Leg - January 31, 2012
hahah
Freneau - January 31, 2012
New meme alert!
RoyalsRetro - January 31, 2012
I think that one will be sticking around for a while
Jeff Zimmerman - January 31, 2012
Yuni's plus hands apparantly don't have Perezence
Yodazilla - February 1, 2012
I love this place.
thejosephboys - January 31, 2012
seriously
I lurk often and rarely sign in, but this was awesome. I love faux-post-modern writing, and applied to baseball the result is excellent. You should write a book like this.
Zackkkkkkkkkkkkkkk - January 31, 2012
I want you doing the forward, simply based off of your user name
Freneau - January 31, 2012
Didn't a couple of physics guys pull off something like this
in a journal called “Social Text” a few years ago?
Juancho - January 31, 2012
the Sokal hoax, yea
Freneau - January 31, 2012
I enjoyed it
However, I have your next challenge: doing a post on the intangibles of Chris Getz through the interpretive lens of the TimeCube.
http://www.timecube.com/
bas - January 31, 2012
oohhhh
Had not been to that site in a while. There’s some pretty awful trash on it now. My bad.
bas - January 31, 2012
Blame the policy debate community
After they get their hooks into a site or meme, it’s all downhill.
WaywardSaint - January 31, 2012
This is why scouting, luck and player evaulation all come into play
There are some things that cannot be measured. I know we hate to admit it, but things like chemistry and leadership do and have always played a role in team sports. A guy can be a 4+ war player and piss everyone off on the team and the team sucks because no one wants to play with them (see Barry Bonds and Albert Belle). A baseball team needs some average players, some good players, and a couple of great players that come together off a team feed off one another and find ways to win. Using football as an example, it was interesting to see Tim Tebow take over for a guy who had better overall stats and seemingly better skills, but yet win more games. It was as if he willed the team to victory. Sometimes the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. I think the SF giants showed that a few years back
la flama blanca - January 31, 2012
can we just kick pena and kendell and put myer as back up catcher?
Chiefshero - January 31, 2012
maybe in 2013
Freneau - January 31, 2012
Fast forward yourself
Kendall is no longer on the roster.
Sweep_the_Leg - January 31, 2012
is he "not on the roster"
or is he hiding via injury list?
Chiefshero - February 1, 2012
I Saw Him
Listed as an important free agent for the Royals this season. It was on the crawl at the bottom of the screen on MLB Network.
philofthenorth - February 2, 2012
me too
I punched my screen
tiquanunderwear - February 3, 2012
More presence than Santa Claus
marbotty - February 1, 2012
I like the series Olney has started
Already we’ve had:
Part 1 – Salvador Perez’s presence
Part 2 – The Royals ST camp’s vibe
I’m looking forward to future installments:
Part 3 – Billy Butler’s soul
Part 4 – Lorenzo Cain’s will
Part 5 – Mike Moustakas’s gutz
Part 6 – Luke Hochevar’s fortitude
Part 7 – Joakim Soria’s chutzpah
Part 8 – Chris Getz’s chi
Part 9 – Brayan Pena’s aura
Part 10 – Kauffman Stadium’s 2012 zeitgeist
Part 11 – Dayton Moore’s fahrvergnügen
Scott McKinney - February 1, 2012
Part 12 - Hosmer's beatification
Part 13 – Johnny’s moxie
Part 14 – Alex’s sticktoitiveness…
johnny4 - February 1, 2012
Part 15: Jonathan Broxton's beer gut
Juancho - February 1, 2012
Also has presence
And it’s own gravitational field.
Scott McKinney - February 1, 2012
you are on fire today...
johnny4 - February 1, 2012
Part 16 - Dayton's flattop
Nighthawk at the Diner - February 1, 2012
I don't think there is any doubt
the Royals have THE best catcher in the AL and maybe all of MLB
maddirishman - February 1, 2012
Hi, my name is Alex...
you should try watching me sometime:
Sweep_the_Leg - February 1, 2012
Neither here nor there, but
I would really like to kick Sandra Bernhardt square in the face.
That is all.
Crooow - February 3, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Royals Review to post a comment.