The Sportswriters Demise

Avid reader Billy M. has been a big supporter of us here at TSD, and we feel that we should reward him, as he has his head on straight (ie: he thinks like we do). He wrote a really good blasting of another Skip Bayless article on the NBA Draft, but it was way too long to publish. Instead, here is his glowing review of Bayless' "Join the Men" column ...


I just read Skip Bayless' latest article, and he is about as easy to criticize as Dan Shanoff. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=bayless/050624

Like, Bayless offers these ridiculous hypothetical suggestions and solutions; he honestly cannot believe most of what he writes.

After basically reminding us of every reason America doesn't love to watch Annika every week- simply put, she's not overly attractive (Skip even says she's a little too masculine) and she is a WOMAN GOLFER. Come on now.

Then, he brings up his ridiculous suggestions that will never happen, that even if she took his advice she would probably fail and prove Skip to be wrong and worst of all his arguments are almost always based on nothing but some stupid situation he imagined.

Take the end of this article:
Only, I think she could do more than make cuts.
If she committed full-time to the men's tour for two years, I believe she could win a tournament. She's that good.

I say go for it, Annika. Do it the right way. Go to Q-School in the fall and earn your PGA card. Work through the first-tournament jitters. Let the hype die down. See if you can relax and win.

OK Skip, YOU think she could do well! You've already proven that you're a moron and that all your arguments are always based on "information someone close to the team or the athlete told you." In other words, your opinions are always based on some mysterious insider. In that case, why would your opinion about sports ever matter? You think Annika could do more than make cuts? Good for you dipshit! What might you base this on? You're an asshole who thinks up ridiculous suggestions and then somehow get paid by ESPN to share them.

What a waste of a column. There is no way Annika is gonna give up two years of her career (especially considering she is already at least 35 years old) to go to Q-school and try to join the men's PGA tour. Further, she has expressed no desire to do so. After she didn't make the cut at the colonial she said she is going back to where she belongs with the women; She hasn't publicly said that she has any urge to join the men again. So why is this news, what do you think has changed in her? If she hasn't expressed any desire to play in another tournament with men, this hypothetical speculation is a waste of time. There is no place for these absurd articles.

Sorry about the brief hiatus there. We here at TSD were a tad unorganized this week, so blame that on us. We will be better about this in the future or else... Anyway, on to yet another review of the diarreah inducing Daily Quickie. Today, we are forced to reckon with:

Some More Bad Jokes:
"Waking up and spending a morning with Maria ... Yes, dear, there IS another woman. (Oh, don't look at me like that; you'd say the same thing.) "
It wouldn't be the Quickie without some really dumb jokes. Luckily, Danny Boy starts his column off with this forehand winner. Actually Dan, I would never even think of saying something so lame. Thanks though.

A Possible Ego Trip:
"'Quick the Vote!'... With that small of a gap, Daily Quickie readers can be the difference-maker this year for our 2005 Instant History MLB MVP. Then, finally, when Lee pulls ahead to win the starting spot, we can claim it was our effort that tipped it. Think of your bragging rights!"
If you don't see where this is going, then my friends, you are one of the lucky ones who has never read a Daily Quickie. Do I think Derrek Lee deserves to start at First Base at the ASG? Yes. Will I vote for him? No way in hell. Not after Danny boy here put this into his column. If Lee somehow pulls off the win here, Shanoff will throw himself a parade and talk about this for months (or even years seeing how pathetic his existence is). Let's forget about the fact that the Quickie has at best a few thousand readers. Maybe some of them even like this moron. If Lee pulls out the victory, it won't be because of the readers or Douchebagoff. So my friends, just say no. This guy does not need the satisfaction.

Yet Another Historic Event:
"When the lock top pick of next year's NBA Draft commits to come to play basketball for a school, it's the Best. Class. Ever. 'Fab One?' Greg Oden is the best prep center prospect since Mourning or O'Neal (or even Ewing). He alone makes a great recruiting class"
It is a new day, so thusly, we are treated to yet another "Best ever". This time, one person makes the best recruiting class in college basketball history. Yeah, that makes sense. I am guarenteeing you this asshat has never even seen a highlight of Oden, let alone seen him play, yet he is going to tell us that he constitutes the best recruiting class ever by himself. Maybe he could make a case that Ohio State's recruiting class is the best ever for bringing in three other top 50 recruits, which he mentions in the next sentence. Nope. All it took was Greg Oden to make it the best ever. Huh?! Can you for once not try to make every bit of sports news some historic event you herpes-ridden twat?

Mastabatory Self Promotion:
"Today on ESPN.com: Quickie Live, Draft Fashion Review, Sneaker Bracket"
I find it interesting that the three main things that are happening on ESPN today are TDQ Live (hosted by the cumrag himself), the Draft Fashion Review (guess who wrote this one? Looks like Danny Boy is trying to justify all of those jokes that he like de cack), and Sneaker bracket (the lame ass brainstorm of who else?). Why focus on articles about the NBA Draft or Free Agency, Baseball, or whatever else when we can have such wonderful sports topics of clothes and shoes. In case you didn't know, Danny boy actually has a vagina. Way to jerk yourself off, winner.

That just about does it, friends. Sorry it wasn't that long like most of the NBA Draft picks according to ESPN's Jay Bilas and Chad Ford. We will be back tomorrow with who knows doing this. If we don't get any help, it may just be me again (insert excitement here). Later homeslices.

We have a champion crowned in a sport (congrats Spurs on the most God awful 7 game series in the history of sports), so you know what that means my fellow TSD'ers. That's right, you got Danny Boy spouting off about dynasties and what not. Luckily, the no talent hack doesn't know what the hell he is talking about which allows us to rip on him yet again (not that we have trouble finding reason to do so or anything). In today's Quickie, we have to deal with:

More Unwarrented Dynasty Talk:
"Is it a dynasty? Yes. But which dynasty? The Spurs' Dynasty? (3 championships in 7 years) Or is it the Duncan Dynasty? (3 Finals MVPs in 7 years) (Or maybe the Horry Dynasty?) (6 titles in 12 years) Not only is Tim Duncan a bona fide dynasty, but his dynasty (along with the Spurs') is the NBA's most impressive since Jordan's Bulls. That's right: Even more impressive than the Lakers."
Unfortunately, we would have had to deal with this either way. Because in Shanoff's world, when a team wins a championship, the D word will always come into play (much like how the cocksore brings up "sweeps" after game 1 victores). If you couldn't count, just to drive his point home, he mentions the word "dynasty" 7 F-ing times in about 50 words there. That's how much of a dynasty the Spurs are after winning fugly. Back where I came from, winning 3 titles in 7 years (with one coming in the lockout shortened season that shouldn't even count) would not even qualify for a sniff of that D word. But back where I came from, we didn't have dipshits posing as sports writers. But we wouldn't be able to expect anything less from Shamoff here, as he wouldn't be able to live with the fact that he is not witnessing something historical. Hopefully someone is able to break through one day and he can just off himself when he realizes that the sports world ain't all he is making it seem. Anyway, the word "dynasty" is pretty subjective nowadays as we really cannot emulate the kind of dominance that was once displayed in sports (due to free agency, larger leagues, etc). But I CAN tell you that this Spurs team is not an f-ing dynasty! Dynasties are dominant, they are consistent, and the term should not be given lightly to teams by hermaphroditic journalists.

It is absurd to say that the Spurs team is a dynasty for winning 3 in 7, yet the Lakers won 3 in 3 and they are trumped. Why is that? You got it! Because whatever team wins now is suddenly better than most any teams from the past in Shamoff's world! Forget the fact that it is much harder to win three championships in a row (the Spurs can't even f-ing pull off two in a row), that it is harder to sustain the hunger and drive necessary to win after you have already tasted success (hello most of Detroit's season. They couldn't play well until they absolutely had to), and that the Lakers won in non-lockout shortened seasons. Are you telling me you would take any of the three Spurs teams over any of the three Lakers teams? If you are, then you just proved the point we constantly make here: that you are a f-ing doucherocket who knows very little about sports.

As this point is already extremely long, let me just quickly say the Tim Duncan and Robert Horry dynasty comments are completely foolish. Now players can be dynasties? Way to keep soaring to new heights, cumdumpster.

More Unfound Definitions:
"What's a dynasty? Sustained championship excellence. It doesn't have to be in a row. In fact, all the more credit that it's not."
Says who?! Where do you get off claiming what the guidelines of a dynasty are?? You are right on the sustained championship excellence part. A monkey could have gotten that part correct, so don't get too high on yourself there. But when did you decide that there should be more credit given when they aren't in a row? Oh that's right. It couldn't be a dynasty or historical otherwise, so you add your little corrolary there. Brilliant. As I stated before, if you don't think winning three championships in a row (let alone two) is more difficult than winning sporadically, then you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

The Absence of Consistency:
Hey readers, did you notice something missing from the column (besides the usual common sense, humor, any logical sports writing, etc)? No "Shut up haters"? No "the experts are wrong"? No "I told you so" tone? Yeah I did too. You ever wonder why? Oh that's right, because his original prediction ended up not happening. Why not slam those who picked Detroit in 7 games like you unneccesarily slammed all of those who had the Spurs in 4-6 games? Oh that's right, because you are the human equivelent to gonnoreah.

Yet Another Attempt At Humor Pulling Up Lame:
"Paternity question: If the Yankees are Pedro's daddy, and the D-Rays are the Yankees' daddy, does that make Tampa, um, Pedro's granddaddy?"
Here's a question for you Shamoff: If you have a terrible joke that you overused an absurd amount of times, and you keep using it but add an even dumber punchline to the end, does that make the joke even dumber? Apparently not. My comparison of Shamoff to Dave Coulier the other day is quite the insult to Coulier. I am sorry Dave. This guy is in a league of his own.

He FINALLY Admits His Line of Thinking!!:
"Coming next week: NBA Draft Mania. Bandwagons I'm on: PG Deron Williams, SG Martell Webster, SF Joey Graham, SF/PF Hakim Warrick, PF David Lee"
That about sums up his philosophy on sports. Couldn't have said it better myself.

That just about does it for today. Tune in next week for more Shamoff hating fun! Have a great weekend, and remember... there's no hope with dope.

As our readership swells to epic sizes(I think we are up to 4 people total, including us three contributors), I wanted to throw out an idea to those who do not have the pleasure of being able to post their venom to this site. This is from the comments page from a few days ago:

"As of right now, we are kind of just feeling our way around this thing and trying to establish an identity. I think we are going to refrain from adding another full time person at this time, but we will be open to it in the future, especially if we expand readership. What we are thinking of doing is allowing the option for guests to have their critiques posted if they are worthy. Obviously, if you have anything to add to what we have posted, you can put your two cents in with a comment. But, we encourage any of the readers here to submit their own critiques to our new email address: SWDemise@gmail.com. If we like it, we will post it (and give you credit of course). If you write enough good work and offer up diverse sources, then we would be more inclined to add you on to the team. So keep that in mind."

The TSD email address has just been added to the left side of the page, so if you want to let us know some of your thoughts on any article, give us ideas on what to write about, offer up praise and/or criticism, or keep us on top of the latest Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes gossip, feel free to shoot us an email. We will be happy to respond. Thanks everyone, and keep on truckin'.

Dan Shanoff. Milli Vanilli. Vanilla Ice. Lindsay Lohan. The Monkees. Ashlee Simpson.

If you're having trouble following my lead here, I'll help you out.
They're all fakes and/or they all steal other peoples ideas/songs.

Dan - can't you come up with some good, quality, ORIGINAL material?

Theft!
Yes, Scoop Jackson did say that this is Duncan's last chance to prove himself. But guess what, Scoop said it. Not you. Stop pilfering from the good (although thats a term used loosely with Scoop) journalists at ESPN.com and come up with your own stuff. Oh wait. You probably can't because you're journalistic abilities are uglier than Kirstie Alley.

Self-Love
I wonder how often Jackoff masturbates per day? It's gotta be at least 10 times, because he sure likes making love to himself in his columns. I have never witnessed someone hype themselves, their ideas or things they have said in the past with less qualms than Shanny:
Two weeks ago, when I made that pick, the "expert" bandwagon was with the Spurs (collectively wiser ESPN.com users were split nearly 50/50.)
Yes, so you made that pick. But as my colleagues the Double R's have pointed out, you also picked the spurs in 4, 5 and 6 and the Pistons in 6. We here at the TSD are very surprised that you did not pick the Spurs in 7 this morning just to cover all of your bases.

Wha-What?
Simply put: The Spurs were expected to win; turns out they were saddled like a Texas stud.
I think at the outset of the series, the Spurs were maybe favored, but they weren't expected to win! They're playing the Defending World Champions for Christmas Sakes! In fact I think you've gone through pains to point this fact out. And now you suddenly forget it to further your self-loving that all the fans finally came around to 'your' point of view...like you were the only person in the world to pick Pistons in 7. Heck. I want the pistons to win tonight, but just to spite you, I think I'm going to root for the Spurs, just so you can shove your predicition up your hairy, swollen asshole.

Say WHAT?
Wait, so you think that Clemens should start over Willis in the ASG. Yet I believe a few weeks ago you were proclaiming Willis the best pitcher in the MLB AND one of the best ever. How can you jump bandwagons like this? In addition, you call Willis a wanna-be. You make the case against yourself in your own column. Willis is going for his 12th win today. Tops in the NL. In addition, his team hasn't scored a run in 24 innings. And yet he still is about to tie for the most wins in the MLB.

Hyperbole makes me want to pukey
Only the greatest women's golfer ever and her march toward a Grand Slam could distract attention from confident 15-y.o. phenom Michelle Wie.
Hell, I dont even follow womens golf and I can name someone that Sorrenstam hasn't surpassed yet: Babe Didrikson. Stop with the GREATEST EVERs. Instant history isn't real because of people like you. When you are forced to, whether by your editors or your inner-self, proclaim such hyperboles, it only weakens your writing, which is weak enough as it is. Annika is GREAT, but she needs to prove herself, by winning the Grand Slam perhaps, to show that she is the BEST. In addition, let us remember that it is impossible to compare golfers from different ages, as the competition and available resources will always be different.

NB "D" L?
The NBDL is a sham. Players will in no way shape or form learn more in the NBDL as they will in college. College teaches life lessons. Accountability, scheduling, team bonding. What is the NBDL going to teach you? How to survive with players like God Shammgod in small towns in the middle of nowhere? No. College is where life lessons are learned, or maybe you don't know that because you were too busy taking it in the poophole and blowing people for coke in your college days. That is not a life lesson Shanoff. And just to add. NBDL is NOT NBA coaching. How many coaches do you see come from the NBDL to the NBA? None.

Shamless Plugs...makes us wonder?
So Shanoff MUST be getting money or some kind of sexual favor, because these shamless plugs of books by Scoop and Bobbito (what kind of name is this?!?!) Garcia are downright maggot ridden. Who cares about books about Shoes? That's worse than a coffee table book about coffee tables!! As I mentioned yesterday, this is the lamest attempt by ESPN.com to generate readership I have ever seen. I yearn for the days of straight sport-reporting without lunatics like Shanoff running the show and having votes on what the best shoe is!

Well, that's it for today. I'm sure Rocke will be back tomorrow with a very exciting column as we finally (I think it's been around 130 days) learn who wins the NBA playoffs. I wish him the best of luck!

Until next week...Remember to demand more from your sports journalists...and a lot more than the stinking pile of snake urine mixed with Leopard shit that Shanoff offers up everday.

It's 1:50 PM EDT and the lead story on ESPN.com is about SHOES?!?!

Give me a fucking break! There is so much going on in the Sportsworld right now - there are about 4 MLB games on AT THIS INSTANT, the CWS is in full swing (sorry, bad pun), the NBA playoffs are GOING TO A GAME SEVEN, heck, I'm sure even Danica is doing something right now you guys could report on that would be more important, more relevant and more fucking sports-related than what is the best sports shoe of all time. Leave this damn joke of a column for page 2 or page 3, because let's be honest, most of the columns there are jokes anyways (yes, I'm looking at you Shanoff and Bayless and Jackson).

And anyways, it's the Chuck Taylors. duh.

Welcome to today's Daily Suckie. I hope you are strapped in and ready to go, because today is going to be quite heated thanks to Harry Knutsack (aka Dan Shanoff). Without further ado, it is time to tear this moron's "column" apart. In today's Quickie, we are forced to deal with:

Gloating and Absurd Comments (What's New?) About the Finals (This Will Be Long):
"Finally: Shut up, haters! The NBA Finals are going to Game 7 for the first time since 1994, which -- combined with the last two great games -- vaults this series from dud to dramatic."
Nice touch, Shanny. In case you didn't get the memo people, one good game in six actually makes this series one of the greatest in NBA history. Luckily, we have Danny boy here to tell us that, because I sure as hell wouldn't have known otherwise. 4 blowouts by an average of 22 points, 1 game that was actually close, and then another one that was settled by 9 points. Yep, I hope ABC is sending these games over to ESPN Classic this moment, because these are destined to become the BEST. FINALS. EVER. Seriously, this has been the least interesting Finals that I can recall, but Mr. Instant History here has to turn everything into some crowning achievement. What if for once in your miserable excuse of a career you actually took something for what it is. Oh, and I want to commend you for the "Shut up haters" line. Just brilliant writing.

"So much for those 'experts': Spurs in 4. Spurs in 5. Spurs in 6. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Here's what you're left with: Spurs in 7? Pistons in 7?!"
Now correct me if I am wrong, but have you ever heard any journalist do this? Go back and rub it in the faces of other journalists who incorrectly pick the outcome of series' before they begin because their editors always feel the need to have them do so? Does anyone consider these people the authority on basketball when they make these predictions? It is common fact that about 1 in 100 writers actually predict a series' outcome correctly, yet we have this douchebag bringing up that everyone is wrong. Why? My guess is that he is loving the fact that HIS pick of Detroit in 7 is still a possibility, and he is waiting to throw himself a parade (my guess is that he would wait for it to coincide with the local "alternative lifestyle" parade in his area) if Detroit does indeed win. That alone my friends is reason enough to have Detroit lose tomorrow night. Do not give this loser the satisfaction. If you know anyone who is into voodoo, you might want to pay them a visit. While you are at it, have the voodoo guy disable Danny Boy's arms so he can't type or write anything. I will send you a Dr. Pepper if you make this happen.

Besides all of this, what needs to be highlighted is the fact that in YESTERDAY'S Quickie, Shanny said this series was over. Now correct me if I am wrong, wouldn't that be an endorsement for "Spurs in 6"? So basically, he just ripped on himself. This guy is worse than a night of the runs after drinking too many Red Bull-Vodkas.

"It's on! The Pistons could do something that's never been done before: Win the last two games on the road in a 2-3-2 NBA Finals."
If I hear that damn "It's On" phrase one more time... Simply put, maybe the minority of people who base the series on how the last game goes wouldn't think "it's off" if we didn't have fairweather writers like you hyping "the end" after each game.

"The time for trashing this Finals is long gone; the time for coronating the Spurs in a 4-, 5- or 6-game walk is gone, too. Better yet: It's so NOT 'Over.'"
Uh the time for trashing the worst Finals in ages is long gone because we are at a game 7? Funny, but I don't think the majority of fans would agree with you there. But who are we to argue? This guy obviously knows what he is talking about, seeing how he has predicted the Pistons in 6 & 7 games, and the Spurs in 4, 5 & 6 games. Now if he can throw in a Spurs in 7 prediction in tomorrow's Quickie, he will have all of his bases covered. This guy is a god, and we are just living in his world.

I am glad to hear that it is not over. Luckily, there are a couple of us who subscribe to the theorem: "It is not over until all of the games are played", so we actually knew this. Now I know this sounds ludicrous, but this line of reasoning actually does exist. Just not in Shanoff's world.

So in conclusion, we learned that: Shanoff is a bandwagon jumping moron, he doesn't know dick about sports, and he probably molests his pets.

A Lack of Understanding of Sports:
"18-year-olds are better off with a year of college P.T. than NBA pine time! What bunk. Show me the college coach who puts an individual player's NBA career above the coach's own career, "system" or whole roster... At least riding the pine in the NBA, the 18-year-old can concentrate full-time on his skills, with the best coaches in the sport focused completely on him fulfilling his potential. His NBA potential."
I have no clue what the fuck he is talking about here. I am utterly speechless. Who in God's name thinks someone would be better off sitting on a bench than playing basketball?! I can't think of a single sport where sitting on a bench and doing drills in practice will turn you into an elite player instead of playing in games. Not one. How can you get better at playing a GAME if you never f-ing play in a GAME!? HOW? Your ability in drills doesn't mean shit if you can't apply it to game time situations. If you want to come with a valid argument for this, then I am all ears. But this is seriously ridiculous. And you want to try to convince us that the coaches are working tirelessly with these kids? If they show they can play in game time situations, then yeah, you bet. But they will be playing at that point anyway. If they aren't ready, the coach will relegate the duty of developing the player to a veteran like Will Perdue or an assistant coach. What is wrong with having a kid go to college, be a prominant part of the team, develop skills by PLAYING, learn leadership skills, and introduce them to the pressures that come with playing big time basketball. Obviously this doesn't even warrent a mention from Danny Boy because he has 8 players straight from high school who did well (while ignoring the 40 who are now working at Denny's).

I Am So Smart... S-M-R-T:
"Tribe sinking: Don't blame this messenger, Indians fans. AL wild-card wannabe exposed for second straight game by reigning WC Red Sox."
I am not even an Indians fan and I want to beat him up for this line. So two losses to the "reigning WC" is a sign that the team is sinking after 9 straight wins. I guess Jackoff is smarter than us all here, predicting the Indians impending doom since they didn't win down the stretch at the end of last season. Great logic. You better pat yourself on the back yet again.

Yet Another Plug For Himself:
"Have you voted in Page 2's Ultimate Sneaker Bracket yet? (And I don't ask simply because I picked and seeded the contenders.)"
I will ignore the fact that his "Quickie Book Club" pick is yet another ESPN.com guy (a former one) because the author in question is dead. I will however not ignore the fact that this cumdumpster is hyping yet another stupid gimmick of his. My ass you aren't asking because YOU picked and seeded the thing. Has anyone cared less about a topic then this? I know I haven't. ESPN must really be reaching for ideas to have to include this on their website.

Wow, that was pretty damn long. Sorry about that, but I had way too much to work with today. Hopefully it didn't cause me to spread myself thin. Anyway, tune in tomorrow when Adam will again do battle with the forces of evil. See you Friday.

In the words of the Urge...I'm just gonna "Jump Right In" Today...

Hey guess what?
All Jews are great at baseball! Did you know that? Look - Sean Green, Gabe Kapler, Mike Lieberthal, Kevin Youkilis, Brad Ausmus, Jason Marquis...and you can't forget the greats - Sandy Koufax and Hank Greenberg. This must mean that ALL Jews are good at baseball.

In essence, that is what Sha-na-na-off is saying about 18 year olds.

By pointing out 7 successful players who came into the game at the age of 18, he is forgetting about the myriad others who flamed out, ran into trouble with the law, or are now playing in the NBDL or in Europe. Sample size is important, and Shanoff is forgetting this fact in his 'scientific' analysis of the age-limit for the NBA draft.

Granted, I'm all for an age-limit, if only because I value the college game much more than the NBA and would love to see more talent in the NCAA's. But don't base your argument against the limit on such a ridiculously stupid reasoning. And I know you're against an age limit because you're also against an age limit when it comes to women...but hey, that's another story for another time. And I ain't talking about no WNBA!

Enough Already!!!
Prep Class of 2006 stud Greg Oden would have been this year's No. 1 overall pick, and it wouldn't have been a debate. Rising high school junior O.J. Mayo would be the No. 1 overall pick this year, next year, 2007 and last year, if he could have been eligible. Not ready?!
First of all Shanoff...have you seen either of these guys play in person? I highly doubt it. So who are you, a lame ass sports-writer, to say who would be the No. 1 pick?!?! Considering you probably don't even know how to take your thumb out of your ass, I'm definitely not going to take your opinion on who would be the No. 1 draft pick in the NBA.

Stupidest Idea...EVER!
(And if I was a small country, I'd hand out those citizenships like tourist brochures. "O.J. Mayo, sponsored by Micronesia!").
What? How lame is this? I am so angry I can't even address this any further. I'm shaking in anger. If Shanoff were here right now, he'd be screaming for help as I pulled his lower lip over his big ass head and gave him an atomic wedgie!

You're pushing me over the edge...
Ha! Who can't win 2 of 3 at home? That's no indicator.
In the playoffs, with the pressure on, winning 2/3 at home is an indicator of how good you are. They came back to Detroit down 2-0, with many assholes, including one Mr. Shankoff, counting them out, and they put together two impressive wins and would have won the 3rd if not for Robert "I am such a" Horry saving the Spurs.

ENOUGH WITH THE INSTANT HISTORY!
or to crown yet another title for the most dominant NBA team since Jordan retired.
Ok...So you're saying the Lakers were not as dominating as the Spurs? And which retirement are you talking about? If you're talking about retiring from the Wizards...well that was only at the end of the 2003 season...that's like saying I'm the most dominating database entry person since Joe Schmo retired in 2005.

Damn I'm not even halfway through this Suckie...I hope you can all see why we want Shanoff fired...

Blatant idiocy
Second is the new first when it comes to the NBA draft?!?! I don't think so. And why doesn't Shannon mention that Bogut is impressing the bigwigs in Milwaukee by saying how much he'll do for the community (Thanks for the input, Rocke)? That's nearly important to a struggling franchise as how good he'll be on the court. Although, he better be good b/c the Bucks are bad!

Nonsequitor alert!
I'm a sneaker fanatic, so all this week during Page 2's Sneaker Week, I'm throwing in some extras.
Wow. Get this guy the Pullitzer! This is a piece of quality writing here. I think he is best writer in hole world. I like Dan Shanoff. He good.

One more thing...
Hello?!?! Chuck Taylors? How are they not the number one sneaker? Idiot.

Well, that's it for Today's Suckie. A special thanks and welcome to Big Shot Rob for yesterday's column. Obviously, our fight against the dark side has many allies...

Rocke is up tomorrow which I'm sure will be address another Quickie ripe for the roast-beef eating.

To all devoted TSD readers (or reader), it gives me great pleasure to welcome Rob to the team. He will have the Ohio area of sports covered for us now, and will touch on whatever else he feels like (hopefully he learned his lesson in jail and won't be touching on young children anymore). So everyone, give Rob a warm welcome. His fragile ego could use it.

Hello kids, and welcome to Friday's edition of The Daily Suckie. We have many reasons to be thankful that it is the end of the week: We finally can get some sleep, no work for a few days, and most importantly, we get a 2 day break from Shanoff and the Daily Quickie (link on the left as usual). Now, I know what you are thinking. "Rocke, besides being so damn studly, why do you even bother reading that garbage?" Well my friends, I do it to entertain you (ie: our non-existent audience) as well as inform. I know Adam feels the same way, but we want to influence any future journalists to actually write coherent pieces of work. That and we really like to take morons down a notch or two. Anyway, on to the show! In today's Quickie, we are forced to reckon with:

Get This - Old Material:
"'Who's your daddy?!'"
Before I even tackle the monstrosity that is his first point, let me just take the time to quickly address the fact that this phrase was painfully overused by the beginning of the ALCS last year. Yet Shanoff, always the comedian 4 steps behind everyone else, STILL f-ing uses this phrase. The phrase wasn't even funny outside of the confines of Yankee Stadium, but that doesn't stop him.

Not only this, but we are also treated to his 13th rip this week on the Detroit PA announcer in his "Big 5" section. Hey Danny Boy, here is a tip for when you are touring comedy clubs: overusing unfunny jokes isn't going to win you over too many fans. But I hear jamming a rusty wire into your peehole will bring down the house. Keep that in mind when Dave Coulier is taking you to the shed.

Ignoring of His Own Damn Predictions, While Trying to Pretend He Knew What the Hell He Was Talking About:
This is truly why Shanoff is a despicable writer. I challenge anyone who thinks we are too hard on this guy to read his lead item today and not come away loathing this asshole. The following three points are brought up in today's column as a "review" of the Finals series -

"Totally wrong: Early-week bandwagon-leapers who thought the Pistons would get swept, after those first two beat-downs in San Antonio."
You can feel the "I told you so" permeating from this line. The only problem with that is the fact that THIS LINE DESCRIBES HIS OWN DAMN SELF! He was turning against Detroit as soon as they lost game 1, and all but declared them dead by game 2. Now suddenly, Mr. High and Mighty is going to call these people totally wrong and not even mention the fact that he was proudly pulling said bandwagon less than 5 days ago? It wouldn't be so bad if he used the word "We were totally wrong." But to hit out against a group that he was prominantly involved with, and then cop a "I told you so" demeanor is irresponsible, condescending, and most of all, plain dumb. Hey cocksore, most people have the superpower of being able to remember things that were said more than a day ago. You may wipe yourself clean every night when it comes to allegiances or trying to think of jokes, but the rest of the world doesn't. ESAD (I will let you come up with what I am trying to say to Shanoff here).

"Wildly inaccurate: 2004 Finals amnesiacs who predicted the Spurs would/could win 2 of 3 in Detroit to ease through the Finals in 5."
Damn those who made this prediction! Damn those dirty apes to hell! So, let's try to seem like a genius by showing that those who thought the Spurs would have an easy time were wrong. And let's show that this prediction was way off based by condescendingly mentioning the 2004 Finals (seeing how the Pistons were the winners). Gee, isn't that interesting that you brought this point up earlier in your pre-Finals predictions? Are you trying to pat yourself on the back for the fact that you mentioned the Pistons would win the Finals this year because they won last year? I can't see where you are going with that, because you are way too damn respectable (/end sarcasm). Now that is all fine and dandy if you think your prediction is looking good. The only problem with that is that YOU WERE F-ING TAKLING ABOUT HOW THE PISTONS WOULD BE SWEPT AFTER GAMES 1 AND 2!! So the people who predicted the Spurs in 5 are obviously ignorant morons who ignore history. But people who predict sweeps after the first game do not deserve to be pointed out. This my friends is why Shanoff is not only a terrible columnist, but a douchekettle as well.

"Not too shabby: Those who predicted the Pistons would make it competitive once the series went back to Detroit."
Let's try to pat ourselves on the back some more Shanny, because you are trying to insinuate that you did this. The only problem is that you didn't. You said, and I quote, "The only thing that might save the Pistons from the humiliation of a sweep is the psychological edge from the NBA's non sequitur switch to a 2-3-2 Finals format". Interesting. That doesn't sound like quite the endorsement from you. But why would you ever refer to what you said in the past when you don't ever have a set opinion?

After reading this today in the Quickie, I am making it my mission to get this guy fired. If you want in, let me know.

A Disastrous Attempt At Humor:
"The NCAA's dour busybodies known as the Knight Commission will recommend that bowl-game halftime shows become 'more collegiate,' presumably after last year's Ashlee Simpson debacle... would they recommend the float with the frat guys pouring GHB into the grain punch? Or the one with the professor giving the snotty students the inflated grade they demand?"
I have never wanted to say "don't quit your day job" more after a joke, but I actually really want him to in this case. Now this my friends is a dillemma.

Cheap Promotion:
"Father's Day Gifts... ESPN.com's Crasnick... Jim Caple's book"
Maybe ESPN.com is forcing his hand here and making him recommend books by ESPN authors. Or maybe he is trying to get on these guys' good sides so he doesn't get fired. Either way, his promotion of other ESPN columnists when making recommendations is pretty lame. It wouldn't be so bad if he didn't always do this. News flash! This just in: Dan Shanoff is a joke.

Finally, Some Sanity!:
"Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are engaged. Someone, please: Stop the madness."
Seeing something I agree with or an opinion I respect generally happens once every few months at the Quickie. When it does happen, it is so glaring that it must be mentioned. So in light of the absurdity that is Tom Cruise & Katie Holmes' (why Katie, why!?) relationship, I must say Shanoff at least has the right mindset in this instance.

Well kids, I hope I didn't scare you too much. Sometimes though, the Quickie is so absurd that it requires some tough talk from us at TSD. Today was one of those days. Anyway, our friend Adam will be back on Monday with the Suckie. Have a great weekend, and keep reaching for the stars!

Quickie. Suckie. Same difference. Shanoff can't write, but he has the readership. We aren't trained but can still pen some scathing editorials, yet don't have one single reader (and if we do, could you please show yourself and write some comments!?!?!). In all honesty, I think it's better to be anonymous and good, then 'famous' and downright asstastic. But that is what Dan Shanoff is, and this is where our differences start and end.

Now then, once again Shanoff submitted a Quickie (see link on left) with overused jokes, abhorrent journalism and hypocricy by the douche full.

Write from the get go, we have a problem:
Anyone know what Swindal's management style is like?
NO!!! But you're a frikking sportswriter - why the f*ck are you asking us? And honestly...Steinbrenner relinquishing control of the Yankees is so FAR down the road, that this bit of news is barely worth mentioning.

Hypocricy by the elephant dung-full
Shanoff writes this:
When one of the Big Four is playing for the title late on a Sunday, it's great. If none are in the hunt, it's a snoozefest that suddenly makes the NBA Finals look a lot more exciting (by the way...this joke is OLD!!! -- How old is it? As old as the Yankees! lolololololololololol!!!!)

And then, a paragraph later, writes this:
The solution seems simple: Expand the Big Four. Develop (and promote) young new stars.

So...the PGA concentrating on its 4 main stars is a marketing snafu, but the solution is just to bring in more stars??!?!? What kind of enema did Shanoff have when he wrote this? The best solution would be to concentrate on it's stars, while highlighting the complexity and fun of a game that a large part of the American demographic enjoys playing in some form or another (from daily tee-times to business meetings to chip n putt to minigolf to Golden Tee).

Wait a minute...
But everyone can agree that if the Pistons manage to tie the Finals 2-2 with a win at home tonight, the series would most definitely be on.

But didn't Shanoff say yesterday that the series IS on? So wait, is it on, or is it off? I'm not sure. Personally, I think that a series that is at 2-1 is definitely competitive, especially with the way the Pistons one game 3. But apparently, Shanoff is hedging his hyperbole from yesterday with some fence sitting (there's that rusty pole he likes so much) once again.

Wow...
The trade idea that Shanoff has (Kobe to Clippers for Brand and Livingston) is actually a good, reasonable idea. I wonder who from ESPN he stole it from?

All-star snafu
Just wanted to point out: If fans could vote for Pujols as DH, they probably would...but guess what Shanoff? They can't. Only the AL gets a vote for DH. The NL doesn't have that position on its roster. Which is BS, but I think you should have known this...it takes about 5 seconds to vote on MLB.com.

Enough with the Yanks Pitcher Joke!!!
MLB Duel of Day: Randy Johnson vs. Oliver Perez. Yankees get an up-close look at the young stud who may one day replace Big Unit as Yankee ace.

Yesterday he said that the Yankes needed to consider their future pitchers when they built the new yankees stadium. Today he says Perez will one day be their ace. Don't you have anything original to say?

I'm gonna sign off now, because this Quickie reeks like Shanoff's wife's coochie.

Stay tuned tomorrow for Rocke's final take on the Quickie this week. I'll see you on Monday.

Welcome to today's Daily Suckie. Seeing how the Pistons won last night, you knew that today's Daily Quickie (link is on the left of course) would be in fine form. Luckily, it was my turn today and I didn't have to tread through shit river like Adam did yesterday (Michael Jackson themed? Give me a break). Anyway, on to the Suckie! In today's Quickie, we are treated to:

You Guessed It, A Reversal:
"Two Words For You: NEW. SERIES. It is SO back on... The entire mood of the series has shifted. Did you catch it in the 3rd and 4th quarters?"
I turned the game off last night and was expecting to see something along these lines. Luckily, if Shanoff is anything (in addition to a terrible writer, a bandwagoneer, a douchekettle, etc), he is predictable. He was leading the charge in discussing a sweep, and now suddenly, it is "SO back on". If he was a good writer, he would have taken my advice and not gotten overexcited about two games that the Spurs won (and were supposed to have won). What I really don't get is this line that he uses to end this sections of his "column": "But the fan-wagon was definitely too quick to write the Pistons off." I don't know if he is ripping on himself (I don't think he is, as he makes it pretty clear when he does that) or if he unknowingly is being extremely hypocritical and ironic, but he just described himself in a nutshell. He was writing them off after game 1 when he started discussing a sweep.

As a nod to yesterday's Quickie, The Charge: Shanoff is an awful writer who is fickle and has a moronic point of view. The Verdict: Guilty!

Another Bandwagon to Jump On? Yes Please:
"Phil's already hedging: 'It's not going to happen overnight,' he said of his Lakers turnaround job. 'It's going to take some time.' Um, how does 'never' sound?"
Loyal readers (all 2 of you: me and Adam), please mark this date down. I want to refer to it if and when the Lakers are doing well next season. Because when this happens, you can be sure Shanoff will be right back on the Lakers bandwagon (as opposed to the anti-Laker bandwagon that he is on now). I love the fact that Phil Jackson is admitting that his current team is weak and needs improvements, and then Shanoff tries to take him down a notch. If Jackson was being delusional by stating something along the lines that the Lakers are a great team, that is one thing. But what do you expect from a writer who has no class (or talent)?

The All-Knowing Shanoff:
"The lingering question is: Why would Phil put himself through the pain, aside from money and power? Maybe that's the answer."
Back to the Phil Jackson section. In what seems to be a running theme of late, Shanoff suggests that he knows yet another answer that us mere mortals do not know. I don't know why exactly Jackson would be going back to the Lakers. Money and power are definately two things to consider. But what about the fact that Jackson could dispell the myth that he cannot win unless he has superstars to carry him? What about the fun of tackling a challenge like coaching a team that isn't expected to do much? What about being close to his girlfriend again (in case you don't know, she is the boss' daughter)? What about working a job in a city you love? What about... I can keep going here. Instead of actually looking at the full spectrum here, Shanoff takes the low road (again) and tries to paint a picture of someone at one end of the spectrum. Why actually look into something when you can make fun assumptions and write about extremes?

Yet Another Reversal. What F-ing Side Are You On??
"New Nats Mania"
This one isn't so much about what he says in his section. It is the fact that he was pulling the Nationals bandwagon up until they lost a game (after they won 10 in a row mind you), and then quickly abandoned ship. Well, they won last night and look who is back to talking about them yet again in a positive light? If you guessed Shanoff, then you would be correct.

Stale Jokes (That's An Understatement):
"The only thing older than the Yankees' lineup is their stadium. (Thank you... I'll be here all week.)" and "The park's dimensions will be roughly the same (although shouldn't they be considerate of 2009 pitching staff Santana, Perez, Prior, Peavy and Clemens?)"
The first one he obviously pointed out the fact that it was a joke, and not a good one. I wouldn't even be highlighting it if it weren't for the fact that he has already mentioned the Yanks' age in just about every Yanks related piece he has written this year. The other joke, the one where he predicts the Yanks' staff in the future is beyond lame. He actually thinks this is funny because he doesn't put in a self deprecating comment whenever he uses it (and trust me, he has used this more than he used his joke about the Yanks' age). I think Shanoff should start doing a comedy tour with Dave Coulier from Full House, just so we could see definatively who is the unfunniest man alive.

A Truly Dumb-Ass Statement:
"Biggest Stars in NBA: 1. Phil Jackson"
I am absolutely speechless. Phil Jackson is the biggest star in the NBA? I am assuming this is a joke, but who knows. I guess he means who was the biggest story of yesterday. And in Shanoff's world, that is all that matters. History or facts sure don't.

Well my furry friends, that will do it for today's Suckie. I hope you all enjoyed it. Stay tuned tomorrow for Adam's take on Shanoff's clusterfuck of a column. Hopefully, someone else won't get acquitted so Adam doesn't have to deal with another day like yesterday. Peace out homies.

Ah, Dan Shanoff. The most predictable man in all of sports writing. Whether it be his penchant for jumping from one bandwagon to the other, or his irresponsible puns and idiotic analyses, Shanoff is the head-honcho of The Sportswriters Demise, and for that he should be crucified. And that, my friends, is what we do here at TSD. Today, Shanoff served up some god awful commentary on Michael Jackson and produced a feeble attempt at continuity throughout his column. As always, see the link on the left to check out today's Daily Suckie. Caution: Viewing the Daily Suckie may make you throw up in your mouth.

Jacko, by Jackoff
Could there be any other running theme today?
Well yes, there could be Shanoff. But, it's such an obvious theme that of course you will use it, almost as repeatedly as you use that same moisturizer and sock every night before you go to bed. Nearly every single point Shanoff makes today is a reach...and yet it wasn't that slow of a day sportswise...there's interleague, all-star voting, NFL minicamps, CWS...the list goes on and on. Yet Shanoff starts talking about golf being too slow (which could be summed up in one sentence: Yes, it is.) and Matt Walsh (who attended my HS) going into the draft. These are NON stories.

Jumping Jackoff
Ah, the bandwagon jumping occurs again. Watch as Shanoff declares his allegiance to one team (The Spurs) and then quickly jumps to the other: However, who else thinks that with the series moving to Detroit tonight, with the crazy crowd and hopped-up P.A. guy, the calls will go their way.
First of all - refs aren't that fickle. You say that the Pistons are whining, but then you imply that the refs can be swayed by a PA announcer (who you have bashed previously) and the crowd.
Shanoff stradles the fence once again...man he really does like that rusty pole...

Jenius Jackoff
Talk about not really giving supporting evidence for a point! Shanoff declares that the Nationals aren't worthy of their bandwagon because of their runs scored v. runs allowed, yet in his decision that they do deserve the band wagon, he does nothing to refute this claim. So we're just supposed to ignore the fact that the Nats are a sub-.500 team that has gotten a little lucky?

Journalist? Not Jackoff
Our conclusion is, once again, that Shanoff is neither a journalist or a sportswriter, and most definitely IS an idiot, who does not qualify for this job.

Well, that's it today...tune in tomorrow as Rocke will surely be able to hit some home runs on Jackoff's softballs.

I hope everyone had a great weekend. I know it stinks to have to be back in the grind of things, but at least you will be graced with another Suckie from your friends here at TSD. As always, we are given ample ammo to work with, as The Daily Quickie (on the left links as always) serves up another piping hot serving of feces. In today's Quickie, we have:

The Dreaded "S" Word:
"The only thing that might save the Pistons from the humiliation of a sweep is the psychological edge from the NBA's non sequitur switch to a 2-3-2 Finals format (from the usual 2-2-1-1-1)."
Ok, granted the Pistons have looked absolutely terrible in the Finals, but why is it that after both the first and second wins, Shanoff has to keep using the "S" word - sweep. When you think about it, all the Spurs did was win where they are supposed to win (at home). Why does a home team who does what it is supposed to do get treated like they did something tremendous? Shanoff always does this, and this is another reason we think he may have The Clap. And the beauty of this is if the Spurs lost last night, we would be treated to "Are the Spurs done?" talk for not holding home court. It is a Catch-22 of shit writing.

A New Flavor of the Week:
"Why not throw the NL Cy the Nats' way, too? You can have Dontrelle, Clemens, Peavy or Pedro: For now, I'll take innings-eater Livan "Leave-In" Hernandez."
This is classic Shanoff right here. Last week, we were treated to "Dontrelle is the face of baseball". A few weeks ago, we were given the gift of "Peavy is the best pitcher in the NL" talk. And today, we have this. I am thinking that Shanoff either is the biggest f-ing frontrunner I have ever seen, or he is the star of the movie Memento. Does he not remember writing about these things? I can sincerely say that I have never seen someone who writes about sports for a living be so fickle. I can also say that Shanoff is a douchekeg.

Jumping Off Yet Another Bandwagon:
"The difference between "sensation" and "novelty" is the difference between finishing 4th at the Indy 500 and 13th (out of 22) at Saturday's Learjet 500."
I love the title that you give this section of your "column: "Danica or Dud-ica?" Now that is class. You spent two weeks buying into and building up the hype for this girl, saying it was the most important cross-over in the history of mankind. And then she finishes 13th in a race and suddenly she is a dud? Maybe there is a lesson in this: a) Maybe, just maybe, you shouldn't jump on a bandwagon when you know nothing about the person in question. b) Maybe you shouldn't start proclaiming the historical implications until you know what you are talking about. c) Maybe you shouldn't give up support after one friggin' race. d) Maybe you should be working as a janitor on a porn set, because there is no way this gig should be bringing in a paycheck for you.

Moronic Conclusions:
"Mike Tyson:What an embarrassment. Even a KO loss would have been a more graceful finish. Let's not have any more talk about him being on the sports radar ever again."
While Tyson is probably done for (thus not meriting a mention in terms of current sports talk), it would be completely ludicrous to ignore him completely based on his past achievements. But according to Shanoff, he shouldn't ever be on the sports radar ever again. So let's completely ignore the fact that he was probably one of the top 2 or 3 boxers in the history of the sport, the most controversial athlete of our time, and one of the biggest draws in sports, period. Let's just ignore all of that because our friend Shanoff thought his performance sucked and that is the only logical step from here. While we are at it, let's not mention anything about Michael Jordan, as he didn't leave the game gracefully. Great idea.

This guy is unbelievable. He is the Cal Ripken of shit ass sports writing - he has had a consecutive streak of terrible columns that will never be surpassed. And because of that, I can guarentee Adam will have more material to work with tomorrow. Tune in for yet another round kids. I will see you Wednesday.

Well, it's a friday. Usually that means slacking off at work leaving early and being pretty relaxed. But I will make an effort at one thing today, and that is once again ripping Mr. Daniel Shanoff a new poop shoot. Once again in his Daily Quickie (see link on left) Shanoff has made outrageous claims and stupid comments that prove he should not be a sportswriter, even for the heinous outlet of ESPN.com. Today we have:

Enough with the Dynasty Talk!
Myth: "3 in 7" is no dynasty. Reality: What if 3 is sweep? So what? even if it is a sweep, that does not make 3 championships in 7 years a dynasty. Yes, the Spurs are good, but as we've discussed before, they are no Jordan's Bulls or Bird's Celtics or Magic's Lakers. Let it go. Once again you try to make outrageous claims that are obviously wrong. Take this dynasty and shove it where the sun don't shine. Are you eating llama poo again Shanoff?

Who the F Cares?!?!
Myth: PA announcers too loud. Reality: Liven up, S.A. guy!
Myth: Will Smith can rap. Reality: Well...

I mean really...does this matter? Is this sports related? No. Don't bash the Detroiitttttttttttt announcer and then ask the San Antonio guy to be more lively. Plus, are a game's announcers that important, esp to those who watch on TV (which is a majority of the viewers, in case you needed to be reminded, Shanoff).

Complete off-basity (yes it's a word...)
Phil back in L.A. is a D-U-D. Worst. Career-Move. Ever

Actually, LA could really use Jax right now. And his role as a savior will do wonders for the dominant paradigm that he comes to teams that are already very talented and coaxes them just enough to win a championship. Try taking a team where your best player is also a rapist and make it into a contender. I don't think many coaches in the NBA could do that. Granted, I am not rooting for Jax to succeed, because I hate him and I hate the Lakers, but that is what could REALLY happen.

Obvious favoritism
So as soon as the NHL started talking lockout, you said you were happy for the sport to go and laughed at all the fans. But now that the NBA is in labor trouble, you are optimistic and say that nothing will happen and to hold out hope. As a 'journalist' that covers ALL sports, you should not show this type of OBVIOUS bias towards a sport. But the fact that you cover ALL sports is a good thing Shanoff, because pretty soon you're gonna be covering the minor league curling league up in Saskatchewan. Better watch your behind there Shanoff, those guys get a little sexually frustrated in the cold long winters...

Be Bold!
How many "WS Previews" can you predict, Shanoff? In your 'The Big 5', you mentioned that both Twins @ Dodgers and White Sox @ Padres could be World series previews. What next? Is Detroit @ Colorado a possible WS preview?

And with that, I will be signing off for the weekend. Stay tuned for a new Daily Suckie on Monday.
Also needed to give a quick shoutout to my Kickball team, Sorry About Your Daughter, for our 23-0 victory last night in the 1st round of the playoffs. Say WHAT? Say D!

Sorry about not providing you with a high quality Suckie yesterday, but work unfortunately called. I will try to make it up to you with a respectable column today...

After being allowed to escape unscathed for much of the past two weeks, Shanoff will not enjoy this kind of treatment from here on out: TSD is back in business on a regular schedule. Watch out! The Daily Suckie has painstakingly reviewed yet another failed attempt at sports journalism (click on the Daily Quickie link on the left), and here is what we find:

Misleading the Public
"Expectations are so low for the NBA Finals tonight, Las Vegas is only offering an 'under-under.'"
Who the hell is he talking about? All I have been hearing from multiple sources is how the series is going to be great for basketball purists. He goes on to say in his next sentence that 80% of ESPN.com users predict a good or great series. Huh??! I would say that the poll was a great way to gauge what the sports-viewing public is thinking about the Finals. And with the fact that a lot of people think it is going to be a good one, where do you get off saying expectations are "so low" as you put it? Oh that is right, you are trying to create a non-story in hopes of proving you know what you are talking about when the season wraps up. Seriously, do you even have an inkling as to what is going on in the sports world?

A Lack of Knowing What the Fuqua He is Talking About:
"Speaking of expectations..."
Ok, so let me get this straight. Three ESPN.com guys pick the Spurs to win in 5, 6, and 7 games, and this somehow means that there is a trend parallel to the Lakers-Pistons series last year?! Why bother doing proper analysis on a series based on the way the teams play when you can just draw a conclusion based on the results of last year's Finals. It makes perfect sense. The media picked a flawed Lakers team to win because they were in the West and the Pistons were in the East. This year, three members of ESPN's staff choose the Spurs for the fact that they can play any style of basketball, have the deepest team in the league, Finals experience, and the two best players in the series, yet all Shanoff needs to do is look at last year's result (let me remind you he was on that Lakers bandwagon at that time) and determine who will win based on that. Brilliant. Someone should hire this guy to do Summer's Eve commercials.

PS: Your kiss up to ESPN users is lame.

Yet Another Outlandish Claim:
"Dontrelle Willis: First MLB pitcher to reach 10 wins. And, for my money, a much more appropriate "face of baseball" than Jeter."
Um, why is Dontrelle the "face of baseball"? Because he was the first pitcher to earn 10 wins this season? Wow, I didn't know that is all it took. He makes it so simple folks! And this is coming from the guy that joined the "Let's throw Dontrelle under the bus Club" last year when he tanked. 1 1/2 good seasons is all it takes to be "The face of baseball". Remember that folks. It makes sense if you think about it. Andy Van Slyke, Brady Anderson, and Bret Boone also have qualified as Faces of Baseball. Love the logic here Shanoff.

As much as I despise the Yanks and Jeter, there really aren't more than 3-5 players who deserve to represent the game of baseball. Jeter is one of them.

Overuse of a Joke to the Point of Absurdity:
"It also means that we're one step closer to not caring about hockey when the players are actually on the ice, not just not caring when the teams are locked out."
I hate hockey more than just about anything, but I hate Shanoff about 1000 times more. This joke was played out ohhh, back in September of last year, yet he must use it everytime there is a NHL related story. Seriously, shut the f**k up! Give it a rest.

Uneeded Ripping on Sea Bass:
"Cam Neely elected to Hockey Hall of Fame. Wait: I forgot no one cares.What a depressing moment to be a Hockey HOF'er."
Ok, let me get this straight. No one cares at all about Cam "Sea Bass" Neely making the Hockey Hall of Fame, yet you said a few weeks ago in your lame "Who's Got Mo..." section that the WNBA was worth paying attention to. That is rich. I can guarentee you 100 times more people care about Cam Neely as opposed to the WNBA.

PS: Show a little class and tact in your writing. What the hell was the need for this cheap shot?

So what have we learned if nothing else children? That Dan Shanoff should be working as a fluffer in the porn industry. And with that folks, I am off. Our friend Adam will be here for the Big Friday Finish, so tune in tomorrow morning same bat time, same bat channel.

Here at TSD, we take it upon ourselves to highlight mediocrity and absurdity in sportswriting. Much to my own surprise, we haven't yet touched on any of ESPN.com's Skip "My Columns Please - They Are Trash" Bayless' work. That is until now. No more free rides, as it is time to take Bayless to the wood chipper.

The article in question is Bayless June 6th piece, "Flash, Diesel Gotta Have Heart" (found here: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=bayless/050606&num=0). Much like on television when he appears on ESPN 2's Cold Pizza, he shows truly a lack of basic understanding of sports issues, especially in this article when he talks about Dwyane Wade. I think his only involvement in a sport must have been a couple of years of tap dancing in grade school followed by a few years of high school cheerleading. Why do I make such a conclusion? Here is why...

"Wade should have played, if only to inspire his teammates. Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson and Larry Bird would have played, and if Wade is becoming a Hall of Fame player, he should have played, too. Yet Wade, nicknamed "Flash" by Shaq, came off more like a Flash in the pan."
I didn't know having a serious strain of the rib cage area, which would severely hinder any movement at all on the basketball court, renders someone as a flash in the pan. That is brilliant! Because he was advised not to suit up and would have been a detriment on the court because of his lack of movement, that means that he should be criticized to the point where his heart and his achievements should be called into question. Seriously, is this not one of the dumbest arguments you could make in a situation like this?

"Apparently, Wade was shut down by a strained rib muscle. According to the Heat, the team's medical staff advised Wade before the game he could make the injury worse if he tried to play. But who knows for sure?"
Ummm... How about Dwyane Wade and the Heat, jackass? They are the ones who are close to the situation (and dealing with its repercussions). And you? Oh that is right. You are a 3rd class columnist on ESPN.com who has no insight into this situation, no inside sources, nothing. Yet you have the audacity to suggest that we are being lied to by the organization. For what reason!? What is being gained by sitting Wade? How are you holding a job as a columnist? I am wondering if you have naked pictures of the head of ESPN in compromising positions with some donkeys, because there is no way you should be doing this for a living.

"The stunner Saturday night was that Wade came out early and shot around and tested his ability to accelerate and cut. No doubt any rib-area injury can produce pain so searing that it's difficult to take a breath. Yet from the brief video I saw, Wade wasn't completely incapacitated."
I see why Bayless has such a hard time being an effective writer - his true calling is in the athletic health field. He should be an NBA trainer! He saw video, and Wade wasn't completely incapacitated. He should be playing then no questions asked! Case closed!

"So if, in fact, a team doctor advised him not to play, Wade should have overruled him. He has achieved that much stature already. But perhaps he isn't yet wise enough to see the flaws in the save-it-for-7 logic."
That's right, overrule a medical professional. Because you are a good athlete, you are suddenly allowed to dismiss any cautions about your health. It will only potentially hurt your personal health, the future of the team, and quite possibly the league if you ignore warnings and do further damage. This is a great point, Skip. Why don't you ask Grant Hill to back you up here. Remember him? He was the guy that ignored precautions from doctors about his ankle back in the 2000 playoffs while he was still with Detroit. And good thing he did too. It only cost him 4 years of his career, caused a near death experience, rendered him a shell of his former self, and ruined a franchise (Orlando). So yeah, good call on overruling doctors Skip. That is a great idea.

His rants about Shaq are questionable, but lack the disgusting absurdity that permeates his take on Wade's injury. So I will spare him for the rest of the article. My being in Hawaii has given me a much more laid back approach to life the last few weeks, so he should not expect me to be so nice next time around. TSD has officially added Skip Bayless to our $hit list, so watch out.

Well, I take the blame for this being the first entry in a week...but through the whole time, our good friend Dan "two-face" Shanoff has been carrying on his usual routine of hyperbole, bandwagoneering and off-base antics.

Today we have...

Wasted Column
"Hate is Such a Wasted Effort" says Shanoff in regards to a Pistons-Spurs final. But Shanoff was the one to declare that this matchup would be the worst possible finals faceoff (he even admits to it). Yet here he is, trying to cover up his tracks
Hate is such a wasted effort. Why bother? You're going to watch anyway, so why not embrace the pain and enjoy yourself?
But he can't even do an about-face and make it convincing! By saying that the finals is going to be painful, Shanoff reveals who he truly is - a fence-sitter. And to be honest, I think he likes that fencepost up his ass. I just pray it's a rusty post.

Rivarly Shmivalry
Ok, lets get this straight because this has been bugging me for a week.

NOT ALL INTERLEAGUE PLAY IS ABOUT "RIVALRIES"

Yes, the first weekend is supposed to be about Rivalries, and some are forced. But the rest of interleague play is usually one division matched up against the other. For example, this year the NL East teams play the AL West teams. It changes from year to year. Get used to it, Jackoff! Aren't you supoosed to be an informed sportswriter? Oh wait...that's right. You aren't.

Legally Stupid
Leave the legal analysis up to your coworkers on ESPN.com Dan...and don't hate on wrestlers just because you were never man enough to get out there on the mat yourself. I bet the only wrestling you did was with your buddy's little sister...you think she noticed that hard-on you had when you were 13 and she was 8? Now THAT would be a legal issue...

Sports News...No!
Do many people really care about the Sox being on Queer Eye? Probably not. So why waste nearly a quarter of your column on it? It might be worth a mention in odds and ends. But there are many other sports stories out there you can cover...

Worst...Hyperbole...Ever
By declaring the winner of the NBA Finals a dynasty, you took yourself down about 50 notches and are now firmly entrenched in HELL. 2 championships makes a team a dynasty? Since when?! Are you kidding me? Two NBA championships is not THAT hard, and by no means matches up to Jordan's Bulls or the Celts...or even the Lakers of the late 90's early 00's. But once again Shanoff illustrates the main problem of the TSD...the need to make hasty declarations and declare a team or player the "Best". Why dont you take that dynasty and give yourself a douche with it.

Fool.

That's it for today's edition of the Suckie. Rocke is back from Hawaii and will lead us on tomorrow...