Sorry didn’t mean to post annoynomously before. I think we’re mostly in agreement here. I do keep in mind you guys are writers/reporters first, but I think a number of writers should focus a bit more on the reporting and a bit less on the writing. To be honest, unless you write like Halberstam (which very few people do), I don’t really care how well a reporter writes. We clearly disagree on Plaschke, though I’ll concede I don’t read him often since he isn’t a Bay Area reporter – but the few articles I have read and the stuff he says on ESPN….ugh.

Overall, I agree with your points – and I think they highlight what the blogging world can provide to supplement what we get from sportswriters. I realize you can’t (and shouldn’t) be writing something like fangraphs, but I still think it’s reasonable to expect sportswriters to keep up with the knowledge of the game – even if you don’t prefer to look at the more advanced stats, at least learn what they are, it really doesn’t take that much time. At this point I would say I have a pretty good understanding of the stats being put out there by the likes of fangraphs, but I still like to look at BA, OBP and SLG to see how good a hitter is (especially since I have a better idea of the variance of these stats and what qualifies as star/good player/starter/bad player, etc…).

I’ll end with this – I’d just like to see more reporting and less of the stuff ESPN likes to promote (blogger-like opinions) out of the MSM. Also, I can’t quite think of a good way to word this, but I don’t like fans/bloggers who think they’re somehow above aspects of the game because they know/use the newer statistics…all of it should add to our enjoyment of baseball.

By the way, I would also submit that the vast majority of baseball fans are interested in a lot of the stuff that the sabermetric, analytical crowd believes is silly or beneath them. I’d have been fired long ago if I told my editor I wanted to write Fangraphs-type analysis in the paper every day.

As interesting as that stuff is, it is just a sliver of what you need to paint the whole picture. We in the mainstrem media have to cover it all.

I’m a little late getting into this argument, but I have some points. You make a strong point that there is something reporters add that normal fans don’t have access to – players, the front-office, the clubhouse, etc. This information adds a lot of value/knowledge to fans and would be sorely missed if lost.

I think many of us see too many Bill Plasche’s (spelling?) out there in the media, though. Idiots that provide less insider information and more stupid, controversial opinions (often just to be controversial) that are essentially on the same level as the blogs of normal fans. Guys like Bruce Jenkins too eager to take a shot at many of our favorite player (Bonds), who makes a point to ensure we hear their opinion rather than giving us the information we want from them. We can get uninformed opinions from a blog – and oftentimes I’d rather hear from other passionate fans about these subjects than media members.

So I think there’s a balance between the two – guys like Baggs at the merc give us one piece of what we’re looking for, while McC and the stat guys like Dave Cameron (even though I don’t think their stat work is nearly as good as it’s credited) give us another dimension we, as fans, enjoy. I think there’s a lot of fan backlash against the media though, because we’d like to see some of the idiots in “journalism” (their version of it) cut out of the picture entirely.

One last point to top it off. Sportswriters get the opportunity to be closer to the game than us, covering the game on a daily basis and getting paid for it. We, the fans, are envious of this and I believe we have a fair request of a group that has so much power on the game and on fans. If we can put the effort in to learn more about the game, find out what VORP, WAR, UZR and other new stats are to better our knowledge, can you please put the effort in to improve your knowledge about the game as well? It’s discouraging when the writers covering the game don’t care as much as the fans. Not directed at you as an individual Jeff, but sportswriters in general. Especially the ones that are proud their knowledge of the game hasn’t kept up with time.

The most under served and under-informed amongst us need more responsible writing, insight, and context, not less. Most of the disagreements that I have had and or have with mainstream writers is with a handful of notorious controversial opinion writers and with the context in which they report facts. Not reporters, and not truly professional journalists. ESPN literally resides in its own Disney world and it is not them to whom I am referencing.

But if we think about a world where millions of folks without the internet acumen to separate the garbage from the real and objective and contextualized information, that can only be provided professional, trained, educated, ethical, intellectually honest reporters, then we have to ask ourselves if any of us are actually better off.

These sentences from Jeff’s post say it all:

“The Giants don’t exactly invite the public in on their internal discussion, and it takes the hard work of professional reporters to seek those answers. It is work that you just can’t do unless you have experience, access and — to be honest — someone paying you to do it.”

And its not just the Giants and sports. If we mistrust folks in sports, what about government and other institutions (schools, big business, special interest groups, media, etc) that have substantial sway on how each of us, as an individual conducts and enjoys the pursuit of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness on a daily basis, how ill-informed, misinformed, and uninformed will we all become.

I think this dying of newspapers is about the larger, bigger picture of honest information, communication and education. While we may have a tendency to view Major League Baseball and professional sports, as separate from real life, it is not. It is merely a reflection of our culture.

And as much as I like to read my own writing and that of my pals, and others whom I find entertaining, educational and thought provoking, when it comes to consistent and trustworthy reporting, I have to agree that we are in deep trouble if we lose the resources and assets that are the Jeff Fletchers, Henry Shulmans, Joan Ryans, Susan Slussers, and Andrew Baggerlys of the world.

Yes, hopefully their stuff is available on the web in the future. But I can’t see anybody worth a crap doing the strenuous and thick-skinned work of actual reporting doing this for free or at nominal recompense for very long. So there is a very real problem as Jeff suggests.

Now if those online versions disappear, there would indeed be a difference in the information stream. It is incumbent for news organizations to find ways to compete but if they don’t someone else will step in. Sports leagues need to get the info out and they may well certify other media providers for their content distribution.

People don’t use phone booths much anymore but they still talk on the phone.