theBear: DK, I appreciated you writing the ‘Petulant Penguins’ column Sunday. Consensus opinion, including mine, is most likely on your side. My Question: Do you ever experience any ramifications or consequences, either professionally or personally, when writing a critical (in this case borderline hostile), analysis of one any on of the teams you cover? By personal above, I mean your personal relationships with individuals with an organization, aside from your professional one.
DK: Purely personal?
Hm. I’d say that’s not all that common, no more than once a month or every two months.
But angering people professionally occurs almost every day, obviously depending on the content. That’s part of the job. What you try to do is be fair and accountable, meaning work to find as much correct information as possible before forming an opinion, then, after expressing that opinion, showing your face after it’s published and addressing any concerns or criticisms anyone might have. From there, you listen, and you do so with an open mind.
I have to very strongly disagree, though, with your characterization of that column as ‘borderline hostile.’ I wish you’d cited an example where that came across. I didn’t have the most remote hostile thought or intent with any syllable of that piece, and that includes the semi-snarky stuff about Chris Kunitz and the iron deficiency that’s allegedly been plaguing him for a year and change but was only divulged after a three-week slump. My criticism therein was aimed 100 percent at the Penguins for citing that as an explanation — not Kunitz, not the condition, not the reporting — as well as the team’s dating such knowledge back to January, when in multiple conversations I had in Calgary in February the very same people were bitterly disappointed with the very same athlete based solely on his conditioning.
But now they’ve found their eureka moment only after Kunitz slumps?
Give me a break.
It’s absolutely within the realm of writing a column to question that, and I did. I don’t buy it at all. But there’s nothing hostile in that stance.
If you want to see me hostile, Google my name and that of Jerry Sandusky.
pghgolfgirl: You’ve talked on a number of occasions about the Pens’ spin doctors trying to control what is put out to the public. Don’t the Pirates and Steelers do the same thing? How are they different?
DK: I’m pretty sure I’ve never used to precise term ‘spin doctors’ in my life, other than to describe a really bad band from more than a decade ago. So let’s set that one straight.
The Pirates rarely will engage in anything resembling message control. They’ll be reactive on occasion, as they’ve been a couple times with Jung-Ho Kang, but it won’t happen more than once every couple of months, if that. There’s just too much happening on a daily basis to be fretting over messaging and the like. Every day is a new game. Plus, they really just aren’t that proactive on this front.
The Steelers … man, I can’t even come up with an example of message control, at least not where they were trying to get in front of something. Just doesn’t happen. Not part of the mindset.
The Penguins stand out in this category by the biggest margin imaginable. Every day, every situation offers yet another opportunity to control this message or that.
And understand, that’s not necessarily a criticism. They have a right to conduct their business as they wish, just as we as reporters have a right to handle their information as we wish just as you as fans have a right to process what makes it to you as you wish.
But you asked, so …
Jeffrey: So my question is, if you reach 10,000 subscriptions before the year is up, will you be allowed to fly a better airline?
Serious question: With such an up and down showing of late, should we Pens fans be worried as the playoffs approach or will the ship right itself and the true talent show through?
DK: To your first question, cost isn’t the issue in choosing Southwest. Plain and simple, they’re all our airport offers to Florida as nonstops. That said, I’ve avoided Southwest by making one-stop flights at other times, and I’m confident I’ll soon get back to that.
To the second, how you feel about anything is up to you. I’ll never advise readers on how to feel about something. I’ll share how I feel about it, and I’ll offer opinion about how others might feel about it, but there’s a difference between that and advising or recommending.
My own view on the Penguins, pretty much summed up with the Sunday column following the Detroit debacle, is that they’ll be as good as they want to be, assuming these three facets:
1. Much better composure.
2. Much better power play.
3. Game 1 is on the road.
I’m actually serious about that last one. Though I’ve never written it before, I joke about it a lot. No more. I’m increasingly convinced that the single worst place for the Penguins in the postseason will be Consol, where every mistake is magnified, where the crowd (rightly) will hold its collective breath at the first sign of failure or a mishap, where … well, let’s be honest: Nothing good has happened in that building after the moment Mario Lemieux dumped that water at center ice. They lost to the Flyers that same night, and it’s been mostly miserable since.
Go ahead, tell me I’m wrong on this one. Game 1 in New York sounds good.
Blake Comeau was rattled after falling on the back of his head following a check Sunday at Consol. — GETTY
Brenna: DK, it seems like it’s the end of the world again when it comes to the Pens. I still happen to believe this team can play with anyone when their heads are in the right place. We saw that on the California trip. Is that all it is with this team? Is it just a matter of overcoming these mental hurdles or is it something deeper than that?
DK: It’s mental, it’s some of the stuff I just cited in the previous answer, but it’s also health, Brenna. And rather than go over all the standard wood-knocking topics, I’ll focus just on the health of Blake Comeau, who still has trouble with his wrist (though I asked him yesterday if that was banged up on that wicked collision with Henrik Zetterberg, and he said absolutely not), and whatever happens to be plaguing Kunitz, whether it’s being 35 or the Penguins’ sudden — and in my mind, seriously dubious — revelation about iron deficiency.
When the Penguins look like a contender, they’re getting real energy, real production from their top-six wingers. And not just Patric Hornqvist and David Perron. It’s got to be all of them, and they’ve got to be 100 percent in every capacity for that to happen.
I’m purposely over-simplifying here to make the point, I know, but it really feels that important.
Keith DeShields: I know this is typical Steelers form, and as much faith as I have in Kevin Colbert and company, I am a little nervous with the way the defense is shaping up right now. Given the lack of depth at CB, S, and OLB, how do you see the Steelers filling all of these holes?
DK: Well, I’m not sure, to start, why you’d have confidence in Colbert and company in the specific area of free agency after last summer’s colossal bust, Keith. This is the management that tossed $25 million at Mike Mitchell, $4 million at Cam Thomas, $3 million at Lance Moore, $3.85 million at LeGarrette Blount and, in the only two smart signings, less than $800,000 each on Arthur Moats, Brice McCain and Darrius Heyward-Bey.
That’s not exactly cause for high hope.
Being that cornerback Patrick Robinson was on the South Side for a visit yesterday and that another corner, Sterling Moore, is due today, it’s fairly obvious that the Steelers’ top priority is that position. Which is wonderful. That’s as it must be. But it’s not a good crop that’s left. Really isn’t. And whoever signs — I’d rather have Robinson, if you must know, because of his tendency to get his hands on the ball — shouldn’t be measured on whether he’ll start. Almost anyone brought in from the outside should start. So there won’t be much cause for excitement even if the money makes it seem that way. These aren’t great players.
We’ve been over outside linebacker a lot lately, but the safeties don’t need to be cited at all. That will be Mitchell and Shamarko Thomas.
fried003: In roughly four years from now, which program do you feel will be more successful/relevant, Pitt football or basketball?
DK: Can I answer wrestling? How about baseball? Or Suzie McConnell-Serio‘s burgeoning women’s basketball team that’s now heading into the NCAA Tournament? All of these programs are trending upward and might — in the national rankings — genuinely be better than either of the two you cite.
I know that’s not what you asked, but thought I’d toss it in.
To the actual question, I’ll take Jamie Dixon because Dixon’s done it and been there. I appreciate that a lot of folks are excited about Pat Narduzzi, and it’s easy to like what might come of the football team’s offense next season, for sure, with James Conner and Tyler Boyd back. But the fact is Narduzzi’s lifetime record as a head coach is 0-0, and anyone at any level of sport will attest that an assistant’s resume — even a high-level coordinator like this — doesn’t always translate to being the big boss. He has much to prove, and he hasn’t even begun yet.
Dixon takes his shots, some of them deserved, and mostly just because he’s been around long enough that people feel comfortable taking those shots. But the guy’s proven.
zidanesdagger: DK, I realize spring training stats should be taken with a grain of salt, but isn’t it a major concern that the Pirates are dead last in run scored? (They have 35 going into today, and only four teams have less than 50 overall. To contrast, the No. 1 team is Detroit with 90).
Even advanced metrics like defensive shifts and the like mean bumpkus if, you know, you don’t score more than two runs a game.
Are you seeing anything contributing to this, or is it just a spring fluke?
DK: It’s so, so, so much less than that.
Spring stats mean almost nothing, as I mentioned above with the Sanchez answer. And the only reason I even toss in almost is that, in utter isolation, relief pitchers battling for a fringe spot in the pen could be compared on specific points of interest such as strikeouts and walks. Or maybe in an extreme case like Andrew Lambo squeezing his bat to sawdust last March, where his lack of confidence was painfully visible. But even those cases are seldom taken seriously by the actual evaluators, going right up to the GM. Ask Huntington about anything related to a spring number, from someone being 0-for-15 or Craig Monroe slugging three home runs in one day — yeah, I was there for that — and you’ll see for yourself.
There are just too many variables in play to know what’s real, what isn’t. A pitcher will take the mound one day working on nothing other than his fastball. So every hitter stepping into the box knows after about two minutes that he’ll see nothing but heat, then hack away at will. The same is true in reverse, where a hitter will work on going the other way all day long.
It’s immaterial, almost all of it.
Will Brogan: With the combined and well documented struggles of the Penguins’ power play and Steve Downie’s apparent lack of getting the message on not taking an excess of penalties, how much responsibility falls on Rick Tocchet?
DK: A huge portion of it does, Will. He was put in charge of both, and both have been disappointing in the specific areas Tocchet had been challenged to address.
If you caught the video that accompanied last week’s Friday Insider, you might even detect that he’s feeling that heat. He’s a little nervous, on edge.
Let me add this, though: An assistant coach, even one put in charge of a facet of the team, doesn’t have final say. And I can tell you unequivocally here that this is also true of the Penguins and, to this discussion, which players are used on the power play. This franchise always has had — and still has — extraordinary circumstances because of the star talent at hand, and coaches never have been able to operate the team as one would, say, a chess board. They’ve got to first ask if they can have the pieces. Then they’ve got to ask the pieces if they’re cool with being moved a certain way. Then the pieces have to check to make sure they’ve got their favorite pieces alongside them.
Lots and lots of layers.
But no, again, to your broader point, Tocchet has not yet achieved what was asked.
jimmy streich: With Ben Roethlisberger, Le’Veon Bell, Antonio Brown, etc., all signed, is there any reason for the Steelers to go offense early in the coming draft? And with the linebackers situation, what’s the chances of James Harrison returning even if only to help bring along a young guy?
DK: Every day that passes without an edge rusher visiting the South Side strikes me as the Steelers being another day closer to bringing Harrison back. Simple as that. If Jarvis Jones is on one side, Moats and Harrison on the other, and a high draft pick brought in … eh, that’s not ideal, but it’s also not terrible. I’ll keep repeating this, but Moats was better than most might have realized. And he just turned 27, so it’s not like he’s old.
But going with offense early?
Wow, no. Not even at tackle or tight end. I’ll live with another year of trying to get something out of Marcus Gilbert and/or Mike Adams, and I’ll take my chances with a later-round tight end in hopes of grooming a Heath Miller successor. But this draft, by all accounts, has edge rusher written all over it, and corner is right there, as well. That’s too blissful of a coincidence for the Steelers to ignore this summer.
Defense, defense, defense, please.
Matt Tobin: What are the odds that Pittsburgh gets an NBA franchise in the next 20 years?
DK: Close to zero, Matt.
For one, the NBA’s recent moves have been to NBA-only markets, and by that I mean cities where they don’t have to share arenas with the NHL, Oklahoma City, New Orleans, Memphis, etc. There’s a reason for that, and it should be obvious. Nobody likes paying rent to a landlord. The Penguins are in complete control of Consol and even of all the land surrounding it. Any NBA team would be a secondary tenant, and a distant second at that in the financial structure.
For another, and I happen to think this is the far larger issue, Pittsburgh has never been a basketball town, it isn’t one now, and thus it’s unreasonable to envision it will be one. Pitt has its 12,000-plus who show at the Pete, but even the Panthers’ own people will tell you the basketball program’s reach is severely limited compared to the local pro teams. And every pro team that’s ever been tried here not only failed but failed within a season or two of starting up.
So maybe I was overestimating by giving it any shot at all.
MASH: I know you are a journalist and, thus, are not a “fan” of any team. But surely you can be a fan of a particular sport (or two or three). You are obviously a sports fan in general, or you likely wouldn’t have chosen sports journalism over “hard news.” So, my question is, if you ever had any downtime, what would be the sport you enjoy watching the most as a fan, not a journalist?
DK: First, to clarify, I just chose journalism. Choosing sports journalism isn’t really an option, even today in the dwindled print market. If your passion is reporting, then your passion is reporting. Specialties get decided later. I did news at different points in my career, including being dispatched to Belgrade at the height of the Serbian revolution in the late 1990s to report from the front line of turbulent street protests. I know you’ll think this sounds crazy, but the skill set involved really isn’t much different between that and writing about comparatively meaningless games. You still have to know how to do the actual job.
As for a favorite sport to watch, I’ve never hidden that hockey is a first love, though I don’t prioritize it that way here on the site. I love the game, feel the game. But in another given circumstance, I’d just as soon watch a compelling football, baseball, basketball or soccer game. Really. I’ve always enjoyed, maybe more than anything about sports, being able to broaden the horizons.
Dude, I wrote a badminton column from London, bobsled from Sochi. I had as much fun in the crowd for table tennis in Athens as in any venue I can recall. And I can still tell you that, whether as a journalist or observer, that there’s nothing that I watch in any walk of sports that tops the Olympic men’s and women’s 100 meters. It’s a dozen seconds of incomparable theater.
Rick in Tampa: Bucs outfield … potentially best ever?
DK: In franchise history? Baseball history?
Come on now. I know these guys are exciting, and I know some hyperbolic statements have been made about what they could be. But the fact is, there’s an MVP in the middle, there’s a left fielder who’s had an excellent half-season, and there’s a right fielder who hasn’t even had that. The talent is there. The tools are there, offensively and defensively. I think the desire is there, too, knowing all three of Andrew McCutchen, Starling Marte and Gregory Polanco well enough to believe.
But I mentioned all this outfield raving to McCutchen here, and he had a fine reply: “I hope so. We’ll see.”
Thanks to all for participating. Heading out onto the field for batting practice.
I’ll have a new file up later this afternoon and a full column up tomorrow.
March 17, 2015
Tuesday 12 Qs: Sanchez, Kunitz, Colbert, Narduzzi
by Dejan Kovacevic • Five Qs at 5 • Penguins, Pirates, Pitt, Steelers
The steps up to the outfield boardwalk at McKechnie Field this morning. — DEJAN KOVACEVIC
BY DEJAN KOVACEVIC
BRADENTON, Fla. — Welcome to Tuesday 12 Qs, our chat that takes place each week at 9 a.m. and offers you a chance to carry the conversation. Use the comments below to submit an entry, and I’ll tackle them upon arriving at McKechnie Field in the morning. All topics on the table, as always, but I’ll surely be leaning toward baseball here.
UPDATE 9 a.m.: And away we go on a sunny, spectacular morning at McKechnie …
Woodie Alan Band: Tony Sanchez seems to be having a great spring and seems to have straightened out his throwing issues. Is there any scenario in which he makes the team? How are they feeling about Chris Stewart?
DK: Sanchez is 8 for 15 with a home run and two doubles through a couple weeks of Grapefruit ball and, according to people here, is, in fact, holding his own defensively. But be sure that, in addition to spring offensive stats meaning almost nothing, the latter is the priority now and going forward.
Losing Russell Martin is one thing in terms of losing his career-best performance last season, but the far larger loss — and concern — is his glove, arm and ability to handle the pitching staff. Of the Pirates’ catchers in camp, Sanchez would rank fourth defensively, behind Francisco Cervelli, Stewart and top catching prospect Elias Diaz. That’s not a hill he’s going to climb by seeing his pitches over a few days of spring training. He’ll have to show it over time.
Sanchez is a tremendous kid, and anyone who knows him would love to see him do well. But I’ve been of the mind for a long time that this won’t happen in this organization, and this doesn’t change that. He’ll need a better opportunity elsewhere.
ThorCrag: Where do you and/or the Pirates see John Holdzkom fitting into the bullpen and role, assuming everyone else is healthy?
DK: Holdzkom was exceptional last season, obviously, but Neal Huntington’s stated position — and I’m kind of surprised this hasn’t caused more of a stir back home with the fan base — is that he’s not a lock for a roster spot in large part because he has options. Same goes for Jared Hughes, who was even better than Holdzkom if weighing that his performance came over a full season.
The wild card in this is Arquimedes Caminero, a hard-throwing righty the Pirates picked up from the Marlins who has sustained his promise here by fanning a team-high nine in six relief innings so far. The Pirates really like this guy, and he’s out of options. They won’t let him walk away lightly.
Makes for a more interesting bullpen battle than might have been anticipated. And a healthier one, too.
That said, this isn’t the time for experimentation. If Holdzkom and Hughes are your best, and every game counts equally out of all 162 — and they do — take your best guys north. Always.
theBear: DK, I appreciated you writing the ‘Petulant Penguins’ column Sunday. Consensus opinion, including mine, is most likely on your side. My Question: Do you ever experience any ramifications or consequences, either professionally or personally, when writing a critical (in this case borderline hostile), analysis of one any on of the teams you cover? By personal above, I mean your personal relationships with individuals with an organization, aside from your professional one.
DK: Purely personal?
Hm. I’d say that’s not all that common, no more than once a month or every two months.
But angering people professionally occurs almost every day, obviously depending on the content. That’s part of the job. What you try to do is be fair and accountable, meaning work to find as much correct information as possible before forming an opinion, then, after expressing that opinion, showing your face after it’s published and addressing any concerns or criticisms anyone might have. From there, you listen, and you do so with an open mind.
I have to very strongly disagree, though, with your characterization of that column as ‘borderline hostile.’ I wish you’d cited an example where that came across. I didn’t have the most remote hostile thought or intent with any syllable of that piece, and that includes the semi-snarky stuff about Chris Kunitz and the iron deficiency that’s allegedly been plaguing him for a year and change but was only divulged after a three-week slump. My criticism therein was aimed 100 percent at the Penguins for citing that as an explanation — not Kunitz, not the condition, not the reporting — as well as the team’s dating such knowledge back to January, when in multiple conversations I had in Calgary in February the very same people were bitterly disappointed with the very same athlete based solely on his conditioning.
But now they’ve found their eureka moment only after Kunitz slumps?
Give me a break.
It’s absolutely within the realm of writing a column to question that, and I did. I don’t buy it at all. But there’s nothing hostile in that stance.
If you want to see me hostile, Google my name and that of Jerry Sandusky.
pghgolfgirl: You’ve talked on a number of occasions about the Pens’ spin doctors trying to control what is put out to the public. Don’t the Pirates and Steelers do the same thing? How are they different?
DK: I’m pretty sure I’ve never used to precise term ‘spin doctors’ in my life, other than to describe a really bad band from more than a decade ago. So let’s set that one straight.
The Pirates rarely will engage in anything resembling message control. They’ll be reactive on occasion, as they’ve been a couple times with Jung-Ho Kang, but it won’t happen more than once every couple of months, if that. There’s just too much happening on a daily basis to be fretting over messaging and the like. Every day is a new game. Plus, they really just aren’t that proactive on this front.
The Steelers … man, I can’t even come up with an example of message control, at least not where they were trying to get in front of something. Just doesn’t happen. Not part of the mindset.
The Penguins stand out in this category by the biggest margin imaginable. Every day, every situation offers yet another opportunity to control this message or that.
And understand, that’s not necessarily a criticism. They have a right to conduct their business as they wish, just as we as reporters have a right to handle their information as we wish just as you as fans have a right to process what makes it to you as you wish.
But you asked, so …
Jeffrey: So my question is, if you reach 10,000 subscriptions before the year is up, will you be allowed to fly a better airline?
Serious question: With such an up and down showing of late, should we Pens fans be worried as the playoffs approach or will the ship right itself and the true talent show through?
DK: To your first question, cost isn’t the issue in choosing Southwest. Plain and simple, they’re all our airport offers to Florida as nonstops. That said, I’ve avoided Southwest by making one-stop flights at other times, and I’m confident I’ll soon get back to that.
To the second, how you feel about anything is up to you. I’ll never advise readers on how to feel about something. I’ll share how I feel about it, and I’ll offer opinion about how others might feel about it, but there’s a difference between that and advising or recommending.
My own view on the Penguins, pretty much summed up with the Sunday column following the Detroit debacle, is that they’ll be as good as they want to be, assuming these three facets:
1. Much better composure.
2. Much better power play.
3. Game 1 is on the road.
I’m actually serious about that last one. Though I’ve never written it before, I joke about it a lot. No more. I’m increasingly convinced that the single worst place for the Penguins in the postseason will be Consol, where every mistake is magnified, where the crowd (rightly) will hold its collective breath at the first sign of failure or a mishap, where … well, let’s be honest: Nothing good has happened in that building after the moment Mario Lemieux dumped that water at center ice. They lost to the Flyers that same night, and it’s been mostly miserable since.
Go ahead, tell me I’m wrong on this one. Game 1 in New York sounds good.
Blake Comeau was rattled after falling on the back of his head following a check Sunday at Consol. — GETTY
Brenna: DK, it seems like it’s the end of the world again when it comes to the Pens. I still happen to believe this team can play with anyone when their heads are in the right place. We saw that on the California trip. Is that all it is with this team? Is it just a matter of overcoming these mental hurdles or is it something deeper than that?
DK: It’s mental, it’s some of the stuff I just cited in the previous answer, but it’s also health, Brenna. And rather than go over all the standard wood-knocking topics, I’ll focus just on the health of Blake Comeau, who still has trouble with his wrist (though I asked him yesterday if that was banged up on that wicked collision with Henrik Zetterberg, and he said absolutely not), and whatever happens to be plaguing Kunitz, whether it’s being 35 or the Penguins’ sudden — and in my mind, seriously dubious — revelation about iron deficiency.
When the Penguins look like a contender, they’re getting real energy, real production from their top-six wingers. And not just Patric Hornqvist and David Perron. It’s got to be all of them, and they’ve got to be 100 percent in every capacity for that to happen.
I’m purposely over-simplifying here to make the point, I know, but it really feels that important.
Keith DeShields: I know this is typical Steelers form, and as much faith as I have in Kevin Colbert and company, I am a little nervous with the way the defense is shaping up right now. Given the lack of depth at CB, S, and OLB, how do you see the Steelers filling all of these holes?
DK: Well, I’m not sure, to start, why you’d have confidence in Colbert and company in the specific area of free agency after last summer’s colossal bust, Keith. This is the management that tossed $25 million at Mike Mitchell, $4 million at Cam Thomas, $3 million at Lance Moore, $3.85 million at LeGarrette Blount and, in the only two smart signings, less than $800,000 each on Arthur Moats, Brice McCain and Darrius Heyward-Bey.
That’s not exactly cause for high hope.
Being that cornerback Patrick Robinson was on the South Side for a visit yesterday and that another corner, Sterling Moore, is due today, it’s fairly obvious that the Steelers’ top priority is that position. Which is wonderful. That’s as it must be. But it’s not a good crop that’s left. Really isn’t. And whoever signs — I’d rather have Robinson, if you must know, because of his tendency to get his hands on the ball — shouldn’t be measured on whether he’ll start. Almost anyone brought in from the outside should start. So there won’t be much cause for excitement even if the money makes it seem that way. These aren’t great players.
We’ve been over outside linebacker a lot lately, but the safeties don’t need to be cited at all. That will be Mitchell and Shamarko Thomas.
fried003: In roughly four years from now, which program do you feel will be more successful/relevant, Pitt football or basketball?
DK: Can I answer wrestling? How about baseball? Or Suzie McConnell-Serio‘s burgeoning women’s basketball team that’s now heading into the NCAA Tournament? All of these programs are trending upward and might — in the national rankings — genuinely be better than either of the two you cite.
I know that’s not what you asked, but thought I’d toss it in.
To the actual question, I’ll take Jamie Dixon because Dixon’s done it and been there. I appreciate that a lot of folks are excited about Pat Narduzzi, and it’s easy to like what might come of the football team’s offense next season, for sure, with James Conner and Tyler Boyd back. But the fact is Narduzzi’s lifetime record as a head coach is 0-0, and anyone at any level of sport will attest that an assistant’s resume — even a high-level coordinator like this — doesn’t always translate to being the big boss. He has much to prove, and he hasn’t even begun yet.
Dixon takes his shots, some of them deserved, and mostly just because he’s been around long enough that people feel comfortable taking those shots. But the guy’s proven.
zidanesdagger: DK, I realize spring training stats should be taken with a grain of salt, but isn’t it a major concern that the Pirates are dead last in run scored? (They have 35 going into today, and only four teams have less than 50 overall. To contrast, the No. 1 team is Detroit with 90).
Even advanced metrics like defensive shifts and the like mean bumpkus if, you know, you don’t score more than two runs a game.
Are you seeing anything contributing to this, or is it just a spring fluke?
DK: It’s so, so, so much less than that.
Spring stats mean almost nothing, as I mentioned above with the Sanchez answer. And the only reason I even toss in almost is that, in utter isolation, relief pitchers battling for a fringe spot in the pen could be compared on specific points of interest such as strikeouts and walks. Or maybe in an extreme case like Andrew Lambo squeezing his bat to sawdust last March, where his lack of confidence was painfully visible. But even those cases are seldom taken seriously by the actual evaluators, going right up to the GM. Ask Huntington about anything related to a spring number, from someone being 0-for-15 or Craig Monroe slugging three home runs in one day — yeah, I was there for that — and you’ll see for yourself.
There are just too many variables in play to know what’s real, what isn’t. A pitcher will take the mound one day working on nothing other than his fastball. So every hitter stepping into the box knows after about two minutes that he’ll see nothing but heat, then hack away at will. The same is true in reverse, where a hitter will work on going the other way all day long.
It’s immaterial, almost all of it.
Will Brogan: With the combined and well documented struggles of the Penguins’ power play and Steve Downie’s apparent lack of getting the message on not taking an excess of penalties, how much responsibility falls on Rick Tocchet?
DK: A huge portion of it does, Will. He was put in charge of both, and both have been disappointing in the specific areas Tocchet had been challenged to address.
If you caught the video that accompanied last week’s Friday Insider, you might even detect that he’s feeling that heat. He’s a little nervous, on edge.
Let me add this, though: An assistant coach, even one put in charge of a facet of the team, doesn’t have final say. And I can tell you unequivocally here that this is also true of the Penguins and, to this discussion, which players are used on the power play. This franchise always has had — and still has — extraordinary circumstances because of the star talent at hand, and coaches never have been able to operate the team as one would, say, a chess board. They’ve got to first ask if they can have the pieces. Then they’ve got to ask the pieces if they’re cool with being moved a certain way. Then the pieces have to check to make sure they’ve got their favorite pieces alongside them.
Lots and lots of layers.
But no, again, to your broader point, Tocchet has not yet achieved what was asked.
jimmy streich: With Ben Roethlisberger, Le’Veon Bell, Antonio Brown, etc., all signed, is there any reason for the Steelers to go offense early in the coming draft? And with the linebackers situation, what’s the chances of James Harrison returning even if only to help bring along a young guy?
DK: Every day that passes without an edge rusher visiting the South Side strikes me as the Steelers being another day closer to bringing Harrison back. Simple as that. If Jarvis Jones is on one side, Moats and Harrison on the other, and a high draft pick brought in … eh, that’s not ideal, but it’s also not terrible. I’ll keep repeating this, but Moats was better than most might have realized. And he just turned 27, so it’s not like he’s old.
But going with offense early?
Wow, no. Not even at tackle or tight end. I’ll live with another year of trying to get something out of Marcus Gilbert and/or Mike Adams, and I’ll take my chances with a later-round tight end in hopes of grooming a Heath Miller successor. But this draft, by all accounts, has edge rusher written all over it, and corner is right there, as well. That’s too blissful of a coincidence for the Steelers to ignore this summer.
Defense, defense, defense, please.
Matt Tobin: What are the odds that Pittsburgh gets an NBA franchise in the next 20 years?
DK: Close to zero, Matt.
For one, the NBA’s recent moves have been to NBA-only markets, and by that I mean cities where they don’t have to share arenas with the NHL, Oklahoma City, New Orleans, Memphis, etc. There’s a reason for that, and it should be obvious. Nobody likes paying rent to a landlord. The Penguins are in complete control of Consol and even of all the land surrounding it. Any NBA team would be a secondary tenant, and a distant second at that in the financial structure.
For another, and I happen to think this is the far larger issue, Pittsburgh has never been a basketball town, it isn’t one now, and thus it’s unreasonable to envision it will be one. Pitt has its 12,000-plus who show at the Pete, but even the Panthers’ own people will tell you the basketball program’s reach is severely limited compared to the local pro teams. And every pro team that’s ever been tried here not only failed but failed within a season or two of starting up.
So maybe I was overestimating by giving it any shot at all.
MASH: I know you are a journalist and, thus, are not a “fan” of any team. But surely you can be a fan of a particular sport (or two or three). You are obviously a sports fan in general, or you likely wouldn’t have chosen sports journalism over “hard news.” So, my question is, if you ever had any downtime, what would be the sport you enjoy watching the most as a fan, not a journalist?
DK: First, to clarify, I just chose journalism. Choosing sports journalism isn’t really an option, even today in the dwindled print market. If your passion is reporting, then your passion is reporting. Specialties get decided later. I did news at different points in my career, including being dispatched to Belgrade at the height of the Serbian revolution in the late 1990s to report from the front line of turbulent street protests. I know you’ll think this sounds crazy, but the skill set involved really isn’t much different between that and writing about comparatively meaningless games. You still have to know how to do the actual job.
As for a favorite sport to watch, I’ve never hidden that hockey is a first love, though I don’t prioritize it that way here on the site. I love the game, feel the game. But in another given circumstance, I’d just as soon watch a compelling football, baseball, basketball or soccer game. Really. I’ve always enjoyed, maybe more than anything about sports, being able to broaden the horizons.
Dude, I wrote a badminton column from London, bobsled from Sochi. I had as much fun in the crowd for table tennis in Athens as in any venue I can recall. And I can still tell you that, whether as a journalist or observer, that there’s nothing that I watch in any walk of sports that tops the Olympic men’s and women’s 100 meters. It’s a dozen seconds of incomparable theater.
Rick in Tampa: Bucs outfield … potentially best ever?
DK: In franchise history? Baseball history?
Come on now. I know these guys are exciting, and I know some hyperbolic statements have been made about what they could be. But the fact is, there’s an MVP in the middle, there’s a left fielder who’s had an excellent half-season, and there’s a right fielder who hasn’t even had that. The talent is there. The tools are there, offensively and defensively. I think the desire is there, too, knowing all three of Andrew McCutchen, Starling Marte and Gregory Polanco well enough to believe.
But I mentioned all this outfield raving to McCutchen here, and he had a fine reply: “I hope so. We’ll see.”
Thanks to all for participating. Heading out onto the field for batting practice.
I’ll have a new file up later this afternoon and a full column up tomorrow.