Here is my original Snell article, in response to everybody else guffawing about Ian's public problems. This article, we daresay, changed the blog-o-sphere conversation in Snell's favor.
Nobody on the blog-o-sphere has defended Snell, on a personal level, more. Ian is young, rich, and famous, and has much to give thanks for. But the M's, with their 82 OPS+ offense, don't have the luxury of prejudiced decisions.
Snell's failure is unfortunate, but the M's response to it is very fortunate.
..............
Sandy, there are a lot of times that you (1) quick-scan my articles, (2) assume you know what my sentiment is, and then (3) confront me based on your mistaken assumptions. Is this going to continue to occur frequently in the future? Because this happens a LOT with you.
You're not that good at reading my mind. I have enough problems accounting for what I do believe, without having to deal with rebukes for things I don't believe. :- )
.................
The performance-based arguments on Snell are interesting. Why not just stick to stuff like that and leave the confrontational stuff out, unless you're going to slow down and make sure you have an author's position straight.
Add new comment
1