Examples in Bad Sportswriting: The Illustrious Dan Barnes

faceless-pajamas

Most of the blogs that cover the Oilers have definite opinions on the various mainstream journalists who cover the team. Terry Jones is invariably disliked, while someone like Robin Brownlee, despite the amount of flack he’s taken since signing up to write at OilersNation is regarded with respect. Dan Barnes is over at the Brownlee end of the spectrum.

That’s probably why his latest offering bothers me so much. Let’s go through it line by line, Fire Joe Morgan-style.

Liam Reddox doesn’t have to please you or me, the leather- lungs in the nosebleeds, the corporate suits in the golds, the talking heads on TV and radio, faceless, pajama-clad bloggers or know-it-all message board posters.

Liam Reddox: Not a pleaser. Not worth the risk. Anyways, if you were wondering how Dan Barnes viewed the Oilers fanbase, he’s conveniently divided it up for us:

  1. Him
  2. Loud people who sit up high in the arena
  3. Rich people who sit low in the arena (note on the last two: we here at OilersNation don’t’ judge you by your seat location)
  4. Pundits
  5. Bloggers – strange creatures without faces who invariably wear their pajamas day and night, and likely live in their mothers’ respective basements. They’re pictured above (and no, that isn’t me – it’s from Wikipedia).
  6. Smug, self-important types who chime in here or at HFBoards

And the 23-year-old sure as heck doesn’t have to apologize to anyone for living his unlikely National Hockey League dream, be that as a first-line left winger, fourth-line centre or any point in-between.

So all of you demanding an apology retract your demand forthwith! He’s just living his dream, guys, leave him in peace.

So while his very presence in the Edmonton Oilers dressing room seems to offend the loud, predictable and tireless backers of Rob Schremp, and those are people who really need a new idea, Reddox’s solid though unspectacular play on the ice continues to impress the only critic whose opinion matters in this case, Craig MacTavish.

Strawman (noun): a weak or sham argument set up to be easily refuted.

Also, since I’m indulging myself in petty criticism, I’m fairly sure that the GM’s opinion is somewhat important as well. Moving on.

“He executes. He’s a foot soldier and he executes. He makes the right play,” said the head coach. “He’s bought himself a lot of rope in the way he plays. He’s reliable. I can play him in the last minute of games. I’m completely comfortable.”

That has been obvious, even painfully so at times. Reddox has played 25 games and contributed five points on three goals and two assists. They are numbers that rightly suggest he’s at best a third-liner at this point in his development. So, too, does his 10:30 average ice time.

In point of fact, among NHL forwards with more than 20 games played, Reddox’s offensive numbers (1.22 PTS/60 minutes EV icetime) rank 328th overall, and his point total (5) ranks 12th among Oilers forwards. That would suggest he’s actually a fourth liner. Ditto for his average ice-time, which ranks 13th among Oilers forwards and 393rd overall among league forwards. Fourth liner.

But that apparent synergy doesn’t appease the anti-Reddox movement, whose members erupt with venomous references to Marty Reasoner or Toby Peterson (sic) every time MacTavish does the unthinkable and elevates their whipping boy to the first or second line.

Synergy (noun): the working together of two things to produce an effect greater than the sum of their individual effects. What synergy is Barnes referring to here? Is it the synergy between Reddox being a foot soldier and Reddox executing? Feel free to chime in below with your suggestions.

As for references to Reasoner and Petersen, maybe and yes. Some folks out there remain convinced that Reasoner was a problem, but I think blogs and pundits on the whole have been fairly consistent in evaluating Reasoner as a useful veteran player. Still, at least he’s right in suggesting Toby Petersen as a comparable.

It happened again Friday when Dustin Penner was benched against Minnesota and Reddox jumped into his left wing slot on the top line with Shawn Horcoff and Ales Hemsky. He is, in fact, MacTavish’s default position player.

I can’t argue with that – MacTavish does play him at any position. Still, maybe I’m off track here but does it seem odd that the guy Barnes listed as “ at best a third-liner” (actually a 4th-liner) is MacTavish’s default fill-in?

Though Reddox claims he hasn’t heard any of the vitriol, it wouldn’t bother him if he did.

“It’s understandable,” he said after Saturday’s practice.

After all, he’s been stung with variations of the criticism forever, and the constant assault contributed to lowered expectations on his draft weekend in Raleigh, N.C.

Liam Reddox: Immune to your disdain.

“I’d had a pretty good year in junior, led my team in scoring. But I was told I was too small and wouldn’t be able to play that way at the next level. Edmonton took a chance. They took me in the fourth round.”

That was five years ago and he is just now making good on their modest investment. He is doing it wisely too, playing safe, sound hockey that will get him another game, adopting a defence-first approach and attention to detail that doesn’t change even when his line assignment does. He won’t win the Oilers many games, but he won’t lose any.

Since Reddox won’t win games, and won’t lose games, is he playing for the tie? Because, if that’s the case, someone should let him know that the NHL no longer allows games to end in a tie. Again, perhaps I’m on the wrong track here, but does it sound like Reddox is a non-factor, albeit a wise non-factor?

He has also scored three times, against Minnesota, Colorado and Ottawa. Despite the fact he’s only five foot 11, 180 pounds, he wins enough physical battles down low to whack home a loose puck now and then. He’s had chances for several more, but there are obvious limitations to his game.

Given that Reddox has been on the ice for seven goals for and eleven goals against, it’s probably a fair argument that he loses enough physical battles to have a goal scored against now and then. The fact that he’s one of the worst Oilers on the team by shots for/shots against would seem to indicate that his opposition has had chances for several more goals as well.

He will kill penalties, see the truly odd shift on the power play, and survive because of his versatility and reliability. While Schremp has to digest harsh and unnecessary comments from MacTavish about his lack of foot speed and Gilbert Brule seems victimized by the fact he’s a few games away from needing to clear waivers the next time he comes up, Reddox sits in the catbird seat. If that means he’s a target for fans who don’t like his game or abhor MacTavish’s fondness for grinders, fire away.

It’s actually quite sad how rarely the phrase “catbird seat” is used in modern writing. The National Association of Words Not Commonly Used (NAWNCU) commends you for your efforts, Dan.
By the way, the best point in this whole article is that Reddox comes out ahead of Brule by virtue of waiver eligibility. It’s just a shame that the strongest argument in Barnes’ article is an off-hand reference 15 or so paragraphs in.

He knows what and who he is and how hard he had to work in Peterborough, Stockton and Springfield to get here. He’s a 23-year-old rookie who has played 26 games, including one last season, and he doesn’t think it’s fair to suggest he’ll never get any better.

I’m sure that Reddox knowing who and what he is will come in handy down the line. I mean, it has for me – just watch:

Who: Liam Reddox

What: 4th line forward

Out of curiosity, has anyone suggested that Reddox has peaked as a player, or does this fall into the category of strawmen again?

Oh yes, he’ll get more time. Because MacTavish doesn’t have to please you or me, the leather-lungs, the suits, the bloggers, the posters or the critics. He has to make the playoffs. And he thinks Reddox will help him do exactly that.

Two notes:

  1. The now openly recognized goal of the team is a playoff spot.
  2. Liam Reddox, who rather improbably neither wins nor loses games, will help MacTavish get this team to the playoffs.

The ironic thing here is that if the premise is that Liam Reddox is a decent call-up, I’d agree. I might argue the following points:

  1. Gilbert Brule is running out of waiver eligibility.
  2. Liam Reddox is averaging just over ten minutes a game, so despite some of the odd situational use, on average he really isn’t being run out there more than a garden variety fourth-line hockey player.
  3. Because the first line of Penner, Hemsky and Horcoff faces tough opponents, when Hemsky was injured they needed a defensively reliable forward at RW. It didn’t make sense to put Cole there, because of his chemistry with Gagner, and Pisani was hurt which limited the coach’s options.
  4. Liam Reddox was a goal-scorer in junior and has been close to a point per game pace in the minors, despite being used against the opposing team’s best players. Based on his play in Springfield, he’s clearly ahead of everyone other than Ryan Potulny and Gilbert Brule, and is likely better suited to a defensive role than either of those two.
    Then again, I am a pajama-clad faceless monster, so what do I know?
  • Hippy

    "Because MacTavish doesn’t have to please you or me, the leather-lungs, the suits, the bloggers, the posters or the critics. He has to make the playoffs."

    Umm, wouldn't making the playoffs more or less please said people?

    And I love how Barnes makes it out to be an Anit-Reddox movement. I don't think anyone has anything against Reddox the person, or the player really. He just happens to fall in line with yet another head scratching move by management and MacT when it comes to choosing someone to fill a void in the roster. There are other guys in the system that the majority feel should be in Reddox's spot before him.

  • Hippy

    HAHAHAHAHAHA I read that and thought "Since when does BingoFuel know all this stuff about Reddox??" and then I thought "Why doesn't this guy write instead of edit??"

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

    *cough*

    Seriously though. Reddox is a nerd.

  • Hippy

    @ Wanye Gretz:
    You know the only things I like to write about are the way the Oilers manage their public image (read: poorly), and how Daryl Katz is richer than the entire roster of Norse and Greek Gods.

    All I know about hockey is ice. and stick. and beer.

    Now let's get back to the real discussion: Reddox. And Barnes.

  • Hippy

    @ RobinB:

    There's no doubt in my mind that Dan Barnes is in the upper echelon of hockey writers, but this particular piece just got under my skin. Between the gratuitous shots at critics and the "you're either for Schremp or Reddox" tone, I was irked.

    Probably just an off-day, but it isn't like he particularly cares what I think anyway, as I lounge around in my PJ's.

  • Hippy

    While I am at it and I read the Barnes piece and I have some other thoughts which I will present as an open letter to a guy who will never read it.

    Kind of like a letter to Santa, but more hockey related.

    Hey Barnes –

    Want to pump the tire of a prospect who should be getting a shot with the Oil? A guy who has worked tirelessly on becoming more physical, playing whatever role asked of him by the club and yet still gets treated like dirt despite being a very able bodied player and a former first round draft pick to boot?

    His name is Ladislav Smid. Start there if you want to pump the tire of a guy not getting his due. Or if the aim of the article is to stangely draw a line in the sand against the bulk of Oilers Fans – pick an issue with a bit more zip.

    And I don't wear pyjamas all day long Mr. Barnes. I wear your (wife/girlfriend/mistress/daughter/whoever you find the most insulting)'s negligee around for most of the day.

    mmmmm silky.

  • Hippy

    @ Jonathan Willis:

    I have to give Barnes the benefit of the doubt on this one. I see your point as I didn't think it was a particularly good article either, but Barnes is generally a very solid writer so I don't think it's a big deal if he doesn't strike gold everytime.

  • Hippy

    @ RBK:

    That may be the case but that is before he inferred that I wear pyjamas about all day. I am more interested in getting him to talk up Smid and I took my shot in my imaginary letter.

    BAH Damn you and your memory RBK

  • Hippy

    smytty777 wrote:

    @ Jonathan Willis:
    I have to give Barnes the benefit of the doubt on this one. I see your point as I didn’t think it was a particularly good article either, but Barnes is generally a very solid writer so I don’t think it’s a big deal if he doesn’t strike gold everytime.

    Normally, I'd agree, but outside of the use of words like vitriol, venemous, and catbird seat, you could put Terry Jones' name at the top of the article and I wouldn't even think twice.

    It's a big drop from his usual level of quality.

  • Hippy

    So Barnes is generally regarded as a pretty decent read because is prepared to go contrary to the common perceptions, right?

    So what's the point of calling him out when he goes against YOUR common perception?

    It was bound to happen sooner or later because that is why he is regarded as a decent read in the first place.

    If it doesn't happen then he is just another media lacky that you guys tend to rail against. The only difference being that he is your lacky as opposed to the Oilers (as is generally the common claim).

  • Hippy

    Reddox would probably look great out there with Brodziak and (insert fellow for fisticuffs here).

    The flak Reddox gets is undeserved just as it was for Toby Peterson. BUT those player should have never been put in the positions they were in. Peterson on the powerplay? Reddox on the first line.

    This all goes back to the retarded machinations of MacT's mind. Square pegs in round holes, 2+2 is 5 ect. MacT is a good coach, but his arrogance in how he positions his players is unbelievable. His fondness for his MacTavish clones is nauseating.

    Can anybody tell me why in the hell he had Visnovsky, Souray and Gilbert all out on the first power play unit? WTF? Seriously has anybody heard an explanation for that?

  • Hippy

    @ Rick:

    Which perception is that, exactly?

    1) Liam Reddox, hard-working dream-living utility forward, deserves a spot in the lineup.
    2) Bloggers live in their PJ's.
    3) You love Rob Schremp or you love Liam Reddox: that's the line in the sand.

    Because if it's 1) I actually agree with him, and if it's 2) or 3) than I don't see how he could be right.

  • Hippy

    Rick wrote:

    If it doesn’t happen then he is just another media lacky that you guys tend to rail against. The only difference being that he is your lacky as opposed to the Oilers (as is generally the common claim).

    Since you're talking to me, I'll take issue with this. I think Edmonton has a pretty decent media crew; the only guy I have a real problem with is Terry Jones. I've said that repeatedly in places where it isn't a popular thought.

    I disagree plenty with Barnes, Brownlee, Gregor, Ireland, Van Diest, Staples… whoever. I certainly don't think that they're lackies for the Oilers.

    Besides, this isn't about railing against Barnes, it's about taking some light-hearted shots at a guy who just did the same to folks like us (and you, if you remember).

  • Hippy

    JW: I don't think it's smart of you to take on any of the professionals. They are there each and every day collecting quotes and you should be seen and not heard but always read;)

    BTW, I love me some FJM send-up. You know that one of those guys is one of the head writers on The Office, right?

    I'm sorta torn on the whole Barnes thing from the other day. Though I am a MacT guy I read that treatment on Reddox and I winced a little. But I keep giving Dan the benefit of a doubt because when 94 was dealt and every wag was busy burying their heads up Lowe's *** instead of twisting him in knots over all the double-talk, Barnes wrote a couple of columns where he basically threw up his hands and wondered just what the shag was going on.

    I have a hard time forgetting that and that's why I'll cut him some slack.

  • Hippy

    mwhite.dking@nd.sympatico.ca wrote:

    JW: I don’t think it’s smart of you to take on any of the professionals. They are there each and every day collecting quotes and you should be seen and not heard but always read;)
    BTW, I love me some FJM send-up. You know that one of those guys is one of the head writers on The Office, right?
    I’m sorta torn on the whole Barnes thing from the other day. Though I am a MacT guy I read that treatment on Reddox and I winced a little. But I keep giving Dan the benefit of a doubt because when 94 was dealt and every wag was busy burying their heads up Lowe’s *** instead of twisting him in knots over all the double-talk, Barnes wrote a couple of columns where he basically threw up his hands and wondered just what the shag was going on.
    I have a hard time forgetting that and that’s why I’ll cut him some slack.

    Why people still think Smyth was hot shit I'll never know. He always seemed like a turnover machine, never put up a point per game season (80+games) and has hit the toilet since he left. He was at best a 2nd line player who got way too many top line minutes on some bad Oiler teams.

  • Hippy

    Jonathan Willis wrote:

    Since you’re talking to me, I’ll take issue with this.

    In actuality I was speaking more towards the subject than I was you specifically. It just happened that you started the topic.

    In looking around the blogs and forums this subject is often brought up but the big difference is that it is usually broached as some sort of drive by comment and always seems to have the same undertone.

    What it always boils down to is that the guy making the comment is pissed off because the poster either disagrees with what has been said or is unhappy because the columnist isn't concentrating on the so called correct subject matter.

    The guy that posted right below the comment I am replying to is a perfect example. The comment contains a nice smear of the media in general and "forgives" Barnes for this article as if Barnes wrote something that was incorrect.

    It's stupid and I fail to see why a guy like Barnes who is held in high regard by some people for breaking formation needs to be forgiven because he broke formation with the same people that originally praised him for doing so. What are these people looking for? Is it the so called honest voice in the media or is it a media guy that speaks for them? There is a significant difference.

    As for his article on Reddox I took it as nothing more than Reddox not needing to apologize for getting to where he is at and the points made are accurate. I seriously doubt the comments about the bloggers, posters and Rob Schremp were pointed at you specifically so I don't know why you would take offence to it.

    At the same time, it is easy to figure out that there is a population of bloggers and fans that it applies to directly on target. If a blogger or poster wants to keep on trotting out that the media has their head up Kevin Lowes ass then why isn't it fair game to use the pajama stereo type in a dig back?

  • Hippy

    @ Rick:
    That's what Dennis does. He holds most of the MSM guys in very low regard, particularly me, as anybody can see if you go through his posts.

    His default schtick is we're Lowe-MacTavish ass-kissers, bought and paid for by the Oilers. He's thrown that dig at me so many times — despite evidence to the contrary being posted — he's been told to lay off.

    Now, Dennis just generalizes about the "wags" in this town. It drives him nuts not to mention me by name when he'd rather go that route, but he understands, in no uncertain terms, that if he does it the posts will be zapped. I suspect you've noticed the change in name line from plain, old DENNIS to the e-mail address topping his comments now.

    And you make a good point about the constant digs MSM guys get from people like Dennis, who believe they are smarter and more perceptive than we are — do people like Dennis not expect a shot back when we constantly read what dummies and fartcatchers we are?

  • Hippy

    Robin: there was a change in my name tag because I was looking after my sister's kid; so, I couldn't post with my usual name.

    Also, I didn't realize that any critical posts would be 'zapped' but if that's the way WG or anyone else wants to run things, then I guess that's his deal. I would hope that decree doesn't come from any kind of suggestion from yourself because if so, it makes you look petty and weak. Then again, you really are more disdainful of posters than I am of journos so if Wayne's giving you this cover it allows you to run your Grizzly Bear act to full effect.

    So, you've got that going for you:)

    Seriously, though, I've seen enough poor moves from Lowe that it begged or begs for a bigger treatment and because I haven't seen that, then, yeah, of course I'm gonna wonder what's up and I'm gonna jump to my own conclusions. If you were a fan of a team and you read all the papers and the team was medicore for a long stretch and no one took a run at the guy making the decisions, wouldn't you wonder the very same thing?

    Zap?

    Zap, Zap?:)

    Rick: I don't think it's stupid at all that I gave Barnes a pass for sorta using a soapbox for Reddox. You've got a whole corps who'll at the very most paddycake around Lowe's moves and considering that Barnes had the nuts to come the closest to being a critic, I'll give him some slack for some independent thought.

    I don't want anyone to cater to my own thoughts on the club as much as I want them to be critical of all things. 27's getting the hose now and his salary means he's got to take it. But who cut him that deal?

    CHED is directly in bed with the Oilers so while I don't like it, I'll give them a pass for their propaganda because I know in other cases guys like Steve Stone have tried to be critical of the Cubs while working for WGN and they lost their job for it.

    But what's everyone else's excuse?

  • Hippy

    mwhite.dking@nd.sympatico.ca wrote:

    Rick: I don’t think it’s stupid at all that I gave Barnes a pass for sorta using a soapbox for Reddox. You’ve got a whole corps who’ll at the very most paddycake around Lowe’s moves and considering that Barnes had the nuts to come the closest to being a critic, I’ll give him some slack for some independent thought.

    I wasn't suggesting that it was stupid that you gave him a pass. I was suggesting that it was stupid that you felt the article warranted the need for a pass.

  • Hippy

    @ mwhite.dking@nd.sympatico.ca:
    Give it a rest . . . Comments zapped? I didn't know this . . . my sister's kid. Whatever.

    Critical? By critical do you mean personal attacks on me? I'm not going to find and run past posts of yours AGAIN doing exactly that because I'm done wasting my time.

    You've implied more than once I give MacTavish a free pass. So, I post items I've written that are critical of MacTavish. You say, "Sure, but what about Lowe? You kiss his ass." I post an item critical of Lowe. You say, "Oh, I never saw that. My mistake." A week later, you're back trotting out the same argument again.

    And cut this crap, like the latest post where you ALMOST sound reasonable — Robin, why so worked up, I'm just questioning perfectly legit issues, what's the big deal? — when you'll be back spewing the same insulting stuff again in a week.

    Petty and weak? This isn't your forum, Dennis. Save your spew for your own website (even if nobody will read it).

  • Hippy

    RB: my name and opinions are out there and have been a for a long time so make of them what you will but I'd have no reason to put up a name other than my own if I didn't have to. It's too bad WG can't check IP addresses – or can he? – because he'd see I posted those comments from a different locale. Seriously, dude, you're not special enough to the point where I'd post under different names so that you'd still answer me. Also, I had no idea that WG was doing any kind of Big Brother-ing on your behalf.

    In any case, like I said, one station's reporters have a reason to toe the party line and everyone else doesn't and I always throw you in with everyone else that doesn't.

    And the fact that you get to interview the players doesn't mean that you know any more about this club than I do or any other hardcore fan for that matter.

    If that ever comes to you via a burning bush or some other revelatory forum, maybe you'll just stop being so angry and/or confrontational.

    And if that does or doesn't happen, well, it won't change the way I view how and why the media reports certain things about certain people and lets others off the hook.