Monday, February 05, 2007

Blatant Self Promotion Time

Barry Svrluga of the Washington Post has been making the rounds, speaking to a number of Nats bloggers for an article that appears in today's Post. Despite the fact that I write a blog, which requires a certain degree of delusional self-importance, I'm still a bit sheepish with the self promotion, and with the amount of attention focused on me in the article. Still, my mom's sure to get a kick out of it!

When he first contacted me, I was afraid that it was going to be a dorks in underpants story. Thankfully he avoided that storyline!

As always, I encourage you guys to check out the 14,000 or so blogs on my sidebar. There are some really good ones there that deserve just as much, if not more, attention than I received in this story.

  • For you guys just reading me for the first time, here are the various Stan Speak posts referenced in the story.


    • Hey, nice score, Chris! We're famous! Where's my agent??

      By Blogger JammingEcono, at 2/05/2007 11:53 PM  

    • Don't call me. I'll call you.

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2/05/2007 11:54 PM  

    • We're famous?! You didn't read the story, did you, pendejo?

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2/06/2007 5:10 AM  

    • you mean to tell me that you're not a dork in underpants? please cancel my subscription then.

      By Blogger pete, at 2/06/2007 7:19 AM  

    • Like the old philosopher said, "One outta two ain't bad."

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 2/06/2007 7:21 AM  

    • Well-deserved recognition, and interesting to see it coming from someone who should see you as something of a competitor (since you do his job better than he does and for less money).

      By Blogger JP, at 2/06/2007 7:37 AM  

    • Great ... you're going to be impossible to co-exist with now, aren't you? Should I start taking out the green M&Ms now? ;)

      By Blogger Brian, at 2/06/2007 8:08 AM  

    • Thanks for the comments JP.

      I'll have to disagree with your second part though. Sure, I get paid less than him, but I don't do what he does either. The next day I do any original reporting will be the first, and I wouldn't be able to do 3/4 of the posts I do without the reporting these guys do.

      It's a symbiotic relationship, not a parasitic one.

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 2/06/2007 8:32 AM  

    • (Although I suppose you could argue that it is parasitic since I'm not actually offering Svrulga et all anything with what I do. Maybe "not cancerous" would be a better tortured analogy?)

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 2/06/2007 8:33 AM  

    • Actually "commensalistic" would be the best term.

      You know "Commensalism"? Non-deterimental relationship between two organism? READ A BOOK!

      By Blogger Harper, at 2/06/2007 9:14 AM  

    • Thanks, Mr. Science Man!

      (Hey, who led the league in RBI opportunities last year?)

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 2/06/2007 9:17 AM  

    • Don't sell yourself short Chris. You're a terrific dork in underpants.

      Congratulations on your new found celebrity.

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2/06/2007 9:17 AM  

    • It was a very nice story. And, well deserved for not only you, but so many others that work hard, for the fun of it all, in enjoying Nats Baseball.

      By Blogger Screech's Best Friend, at 2/06/2007 11:20 AM  

    • I've been reading this blog for a little while and I was wondering what your opinion was on the Nats offseason.
      Since 2007 is basically phase one of a complete team overhaul, why did the team toss its cash at a bunch of AAAA players that most fans have never heard of?
      I think Claussen has some potential and Williams might be serviceable but Simontacchi, Womack, Macias? What's the point?

      Why not at least throw a little money at C-list FA players like Mark Redman, Chan Ho Park, Dustin Hermanson or Phil Nevin?

      Most fans would probably be more interested in seeing players that were once pretty good rather than ones who never broke through or were always simply terrible.

      The farm system is one of the worst in the majors so its not like the retreads would be blocking anybody.

      It won't add more than a couple of wins to the season total but at least it will show the fans that the team can afford to acquire players who were considered pretty good not too long ago.

      By Blogger Mark L., at 2/06/2007 12:05 PM  

    • I share your frustration with the marginal, old talent they're bringing in. If Travis Lee, Tony Womack or Jose Macias break camp...ugh.

      That being said, I'd rather they scrape the bottom of the barrel like this than sign retreads like Trachsel or Ramon Ortiz.

      Earlier in the offseason, I had hoped they'd make an effort to sign one of the better FA pitchers, such as Vicente Padilla, as a stopgap measure until the farm starts churning out the arms, but that's a battle that was lost 3 months ago.

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 2/06/2007 12:09 PM  

    • Thanks for your thoughts Chris.
      I agree that the retreads of 2006 don't inspire much confidence, it is just a shame that the organization is aiming so low when there was some pretty decent positional and bullpen talent on the market.
      I wish I knew where all the money was going, I recently read that the Nats are one of the top ten most valuable frachises in baseball. Even through a rebuilding phase, a strong-market team's payroll should never be below $50 million.
      The FO knew the situation for 2006 was grim but they at least had Soriano to put people in the seats.
      If Kasten and Bowden don't try to drum up some sort of buzz, it seems like the Nats will struggle to average 20K per game.

      By Blogger Mark L., at 2/06/2007 12:38 PM  

    • The way they're looking at it though is that if you're going to crap the bed, crap it when your wife isn't home. (I need to work on my metaphors)

      In 08, they'll have the buzz of the new stadium and its new revenues. They can up the payroll then, and by 09/10 when the honeymoon starts to wear off, they'll have enough revenues and will be seeing the fruits of the farm system starting to ripen, and they'll be in a good position going forward.

      I agree with what they're doing long term. It's clearly the right way. I just know that their decision to tank this year is their choice, not something they're forced into doing.

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 2/06/2007 12:42 PM  

    • I'd argue that the 2007 team was going to tank no matter what the front office did, so the options were a) tank with cheap young(ish)players, or b) tank with expensive older players. The expensive older players might have more name recognition, but they're not substantially better than the drek we have on hand.


      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2/06/2007 1:36 PM  

    • While that's true for Ortiz, Trachsel, etc, that's not true for Padilla or some of the other guys out there.

      (Any replies with the word "Meche" will be deleted)

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 2/06/2007 1:38 PM  

    • I guess I should clarify what I meant - it's nice to see a reporter embrace rather than feel threatened by an emerging blogosphere.

      By Blogger JP, at 2/06/2007 1:56 PM  

    • Look, this season is a Nats fans' hazing season. Those who go through the fires of hell will return tempered. We'll be able to look down our noses at all the bandwagoners when THE PLANtm comes together.

      Meanwhile, can't we have fun mocking Tony Womack, screaming for the FO to stop Fing with Ryan Church and watch the box scores from Savannah for Chris Marrero's latest line!

      By Blogger traderkirk, at 2/06/2007 3:09 PM  

    • I read the post article today so I had to stop by and check out the Blog. The Stan speak is even better then Svrluga makes it out to be. Keep up the good work I'll make sure to stop by anytime I'm looking for a great take on the NATS news.

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2/06/2007 3:22 PM  

    • So did you renew your season ticket plan?

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2/08/2007 11:52 AM  

    Post a Comment

    << Home