PDA

View Full Version : DVD at it again


cws05champ
06-08-2008, 07:31 AM
Here is the link to Dave Van Dyck's article on last night's game. The lead sentence goes something like this...and I'm paraphrasing since I can't copy and paste:

The Sox have the worst winning % of any team leading a division (which is not true, Arizona does), but they have a bigger division lead than the best team in baseball, the Cubs.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-080607-chicago-white-sox-minnesota-twins,1,7313532.story

ZombieRob
06-08-2008, 07:41 AM
I know this may seem like a broken record . But who have the Cubs played? They are a solid team for sure with a potent lineup. Best team in baseball? Blah!

rwcescato
06-08-2008, 09:32 AM
Here is the link to Dave Van Dyck's article on last night's game. The lead sentence goes something like this...and I'm paraphrasing since I can't copy and paste:

The Sox have the worst winning % of any team leading a division (which is not true, Arizona does), but they have a bigger division lead than the best team in baseball, the Cubs.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-080607-chicago-white-sox-minnesota-twins,1,7313532.story


I saw that too. I knew it was not correct. If you are going to report something like this at least get it right. Why a negative thing to start with anyways? Lets just keep on winning as much as we can now. You never know when it will turn.

Brian26
06-08-2008, 11:12 AM
Here is the link to Dave Van Dyck's article on last night's game. The lead sentence goes something like this...and I'm paraphrasing since I can't copy and paste:

The Sox have the worst winning % of any team leading a division (which is not true, Arizona does), but they have a bigger division lead than the best team in baseball, the Cubs.

Cry me a river.

The Sox have been ripped off plenty of times in the past, most recently in 2006 when they had 90 wins and still couldn't make the playoffs while St. Louis won the World Series with 83 regular season wins.

Since DVD is complaining and making an issue of this, maybe he should do his homework:

The Cubs in 2003 had the worst winning pct of any division winner (only 85 wins).

The Cubs in 2007 had the worst winning pct of any division winner (only 88 wins).

NOW he's making an issue about the NL Central?

Since the Sox have already done the wire-to-wire 99-win gimmick in 2005, I hope they get in this year as the underdog and wreck havoc all over the so-called "favorites."

turners56
06-08-2008, 11:44 AM
Cry me a river.

The Sox have been ripped off plenty of times in the past, most recently in 2006 when they had 90 wins and still couldn't make the playoffs while St. Louis won the World Series with 83 regular season wins.

Since DVD is complaining and making an issue of this, maybe he should do his homework:

The Cubs in 2003 had the worst winning pct of any division winner (only 85 wins).

The Cubs in 2007 had the worst winning pct of any division winner (only 88 wins).

NOW he's making an issue about the NL Central?

Since the Sox have already done the wire-to-wire 99-win gimmick in 2005, I hope they get in this year as the underdog and wreck havoc all over the so-called "favorites."

You have the 2 years reversed. The Cubs won 85 games last year, which is extremely pathetic. They won 88 in 2003, which at that time, looked like crap when Florida, a wild card team, won 90 games and the Braves won 101 that year.

If there were Cubs fans on this forum, I would be flamed for talking about last season like it mattered. Just like how if the Cubs somehow won the WS in 2007, Cubs fans would still be living in 2007, hell, they might even be talking about it in 2057. Cubs fans are extremely biased and irrational, more biased than any fan of any other team, even the Red Sox. And when the Trib is full of Cub mania, things like Van Dyck said in his article will happen quite often. Honestly, I can't wait for the cross-town series to kick their sorry asses.

MarySwiss
06-08-2008, 12:13 PM
BTW, the article now reads "second-worst" percentage.

Lip Man 1
06-08-2008, 12:31 PM
They may have changed it because of Scott Reifert's comments about it in his blog entry at whitesox.com.

Scott was perplexed (that's as good a word as any) over it and the way the story was written in general.

The "notation" has already made the Chicago Cubune web site as well! LOL

Lip

soxpride724
06-08-2008, 12:31 PM
DVD is a worthless piece of ****. sorry ass excuse of a reporter, get your **** right *******.

turners56
06-08-2008, 01:59 PM
Van Dyck is on the rain-delay show with Rongey right now. He sounds like a completely biased Sox fan right now, saying how great it would be for the Sox to beat the Cubs in the Series. I guess that article he wrote earlier wasn't really written by him...

doublem23
06-08-2008, 02:23 PM
Whatever, they don't make the division leader with the worst winning percentage stay home, so this is pretty much just complaining for the sake of complaining

rocky biddle
06-09-2008, 08:39 AM
Van Dyck is on the rain-delay show with Rongey right now. He sounds like a completely biased Sox fan right now, saying how great it would be for the Sox to beat the Cubs in the Series. I guess that article he wrote earlier wasn't really written by him...

Maybe he got called into Mr. Zell's office for a little tuning of the "house organ".

jackbrohamer
06-09-2008, 09:18 AM
van Dyck has turned himself into one of the most odious Sox-haters in town, which is quite an accomplishiment. Articles such as the one linked in this thread are almost comical in how amateurish they are. I used to think he was a pretty decent writer, what the hell happened to him.