So we're catching up on our podcasts today, listening to McCown and Brunt talk to Dan Shulman on PTS, which we figure should be gold. But then the conversation turns towards Reed Johnson, and the everlasting mancrush that all three gentlemen have for him.That's when it got strange. Shulman said the following in comparing Reed Johnson to his putative replacement Shannon Stewart:
"Shannon Stewart doesn't have the intangibles that Reed Johnson does."
We had to stop the podcast, sit down on a rock like Rodin's Thinker and figure this one out for ourselves.
If intangibles are things that you can't quantify or measure, then how can we judge whether or not if one person has more immeasurable qualities than another? How can we assess the relative value on things which have no palpable value?
Maybe Shulman (along with the two ditto heads in the Fan 590 booth) should have dropped the voice authority and pseudo-expertise and just said flat out "I like Reed Johnson better." Because how ever much you want to pretty it up with false analysis, that's exactly what he was saying.
And really, there's really no shame in that. Except for the fact that Reed Johnson runs like a girl.
5 comments:
I think by intangibles, he means the ability to HIT!
And run, and throw
I like Shannon but RELEASING Johnson was a firing offense. I guess they needed more catchers in the lineup.
Depth, does Rogers sell that channel?
Oh goody, career numbers. So if the Jays ever need to win a game being played in the year 2000 again, they're set.
Or maybe more to the point with Reed Johnson: if you need to win a game in the first six weeks of 2006, then he's your guy.
True that- but then with Lind coming up after the first four anyway, that doesn't seem like such a bad deal...
Post a Comment