Jump to content

Ok, we need to talk about Keith Law...


The Epic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply
...ok, no, we don't, but still.

Listen to the first, say, 7 minutes.

Now, note that I really, really, really like Keith Law...when he isn't talking about the Orioles. Seriously, did someone go #1 in his Corn Flakes? He just talks about them with so much...rage. Absolute rage.

I just don't understand how he can be so defiant.

I used to respect Law, but it does seem more and more that he has some sort of personal issue with DD. He was really grasping on the Bundy cutter issue imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eric Karabell even seems to know that he's not going to give any credit to the Orioles. He seems to be getting annoyed at Keith as the thing goes on.

Also, wtf is Law talking about Baltimore being healthy. Britton was injured, Roberts was here for a week, Markakis missed time, Reynolds missed time, Reimold has missed nearly the entire season, Thome went down shortly after we dealt for him, Hammell (our best pitcher) has missed ~half of the season, and the list goes on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eric Karabell even seems to know that he's not going to give any credit to the Orioles. He seems to be getting annoyed at Keith as the thing goes on.

Also, wtf is Law talking about Baltimore being healthy. Britton was injured, Roberts was here for a week, Markakis missed time, Reynolds missed time, Reimold has missed nearly the entire season, Thome went down shortly after we dealt for him, Hammell (our best pitcher) has missed ~half of the season, and the list goes on...

Hence him being uninformed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, at least we know now that if we win the world series, Law won't change him mind---we'll be just like the 2006 Cardinals. It became clear that winning is not part of his definition of quality. Quality is an determinable ability that may not always come to the front. Thus, the Germans had the highest quality army in World War II, Custer had better soldiers than the Indians at the Little Big Horn, Koufax and Drysdale made the Dodgers the better team even though the Orioles obliterated them back in the 60s. As an American politician once said: "I'd rather be right than President." That's Law. But as the reply of the day went "You sir, have no chance of being either one."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm at work so I can't listen to the audio. I remember that Law was upset when the scouts were reassigned, so that may be affecting his judgement. But if you like Law in general, like what he has to say about every other team, but can't stand what he says about the O's.... well, maybe he's not the one that's biased.

Like I said, though, I haven't heard the audio, so I may be off base. But from following Law on Twitter, I know there are plenty of people who feel that Law is totally biased against only their specific team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was livid when DD reassigned those scouts last year. I imagine he knows one or more of them personally.

Good info but a quick google search shows his hatred for the Orioles goes back for years. Maybe he was passed up for a job in Baltimore before he worked for Toronto? A lot of his stuff from as far back as mid 2000's was ridiculously critical of the Orioles. More so than other teams by far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good info but a quick google search shows his hatred for the Orioles goes back for years. Maybe he was passed up for a job in Baltimore before he worked for Toronto? A lot of his stuff from as far back as mid 2000's was ridiculously critical of the Orioles. More so than other teams by far.

Well, how were those O's teams run compared to other teams?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He does come off as very curmudgeonly and hard-headed. Even if he thinks he's 100% right and they're not good, he doesn't give off any sense of joy or wonder that a team that isn't good could be on the cusp of making the playoffs. It's like, they suck and they're playing well, and that pisses him off.

Not to mention his analysis is off in a lot of ways.

1) As has already been pointed out, the O's have not been without injuries to key players.

2) Even players who weren't injured (namely the "Calvary") have been non-factors in the roles that they were expected to play.

3) He apologizes for the Yankees' performance over the weekend, citing their injuries. Well, last time I checked, having depth is part of being a good team. You can't say, well "the Yankees are good, except they don't have depth." No, it's more like, "Because the Yankees don't have depth, they're not as good as they would be if they had depth."

4) And if he's willing to say, "The Yankees are good, except they don't have depth," then why not give that same level of nuanced view of the Orioles? For example, "Their bullpen is amazing, but I just don't think they have the starting pitching or consistent hitting to make it to the playoffs." Nope - while the Yankees get a nuanced view, for the Orioles, it's just "They're not good."

5) Finally, the whole run differential thing. The interesting thing would be if the O's score 40 more runs than they give up over the rest of the season, if he would change his tune about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...