Having been gone for a goodly amount of time, I return refreshed and tickled pink into the loving arms of Razzball. I have some new categories, as I’ve decided that limiting things is too…erm…limiting? Know that I’ll still list my glossary of category titles because it’s right below this section, so I’m not sure why I’m reassuring you of something that is incredibly obvious. Know that I recognize the profound redundancy, however, I follow a version of Radical Truth that allows me the freedom to make mistakes and immediately reflect on the different species of humiliation I endure publicly upon their consumption. There’s a reason you can almost spell “mutilation” from the letters in “humiliation.” Mostly it’s to make your partner curse to themself while not quite having the right letter combos in Spelltower.
A Blurbstomp Reminder
We will analyze player blurbs from a given evening, knowing that 1-2 writers are usually responsible for all the player write-ups posted within an hour of the game results. We will look at:
- Flowery Diction – how sites juice up descriptions of player performance
- Q and Q – when a site contradicts a player valuation on back-to-back blurbs
- If I Were a Manager – When blurbs let you know they’re smarter than MLB decision-makers
- Town Crier – When a blurbist is too quick with a hot take
The hope is that by season’s end, we’ll all feel more confident about our player evaluations when it comes to the waiver wire. We will read blurbs and not be swayed by excessive superlatives, faulty injury reporting, and micro-hype. I will know that I have done my job when Grey posts, and there isn’t a single question about catchers that he did not address in his post. Onward to Roto Wokeness!
Flowery Diction
Bryan De La Cruz went 3-for-4 with a stolen base on Thursday in the Marlins’ victory over the Nationals.
De La Cruz notched his third consecutive multi-hit effort and also registered his first steal of the season. The 24-year-old rookie outfielder hasn’t exactly gotten off to a torrid start at the major-league level, but he’s compiled a robust .357/.396/.476 triple-slash line with five runs scored, two home runs, eight RBI and one stolen base across 91 plate appearances. There’s some BABIP regression looming, but he looks like a potential NL-only contributor for fantasy managers moving forward.
Source: Rotoedgesportsworld.com
Torrid
- Very hot and dry
- Full of passionate or highly charged emotions arising from sexual love
- Full of difficulty or tribulation
Robust
- Strong and healthy, vigorous
- Strong and rich in flavor and smell
The contradictions are boundless. The second sentence needs translation help, so using these definitions, I’ll do my best:
“The 24-year-old rookie outfielder hasn’t gotten off to a hot and dry start, but he’s compiled a strong and healthy (if not vigorous) .357/.396/.476….”
A lot of people think that torrid means “hot” and not “hot and dry,” which I get. However, the author uses it to say that De La Cruz hasn’t been great, and within the same sentence contradicts themself by stating he’s producing at a robust rate. Which is it, friend? And why isn’t it the second usage of the adjective torrid? We are a nation founded on the principles set by Pilgrims whose religious and sexual practices were considered murder-level bad in England back in the day. Surely our brain spaces can handle the idea of highly charged emotions arising from the sexual love one feels between fantasy manager and baseball player statistic.
I’m just going to leave the former paragraph here because I’m brave, like my forefathers. Seriously though, the House on the Hill was freaky, and if still existed in the 70’s, there would be mad key parties.
If I Were a Manager
Christian Walker finished 4-for-4 with a walk versus the Phillies on Thursday.
It’s been an awfully quiet season for Walker, but he was good tonight, raising his average 10 points to .243. We still think the Diamondbacks should be playing Seth Beer at first base right now, but the team is fond of its veterans.
Source: Rotoedgesportsworld.com
Where in world is there anything in Rotoworld’s blurbs about Christian Walker and/or Seth Beer stating that Beer should be starting at first base? You can’t use the words “we still think” if you’ve never shared that opinion, as it’s a lazy attempt to assert a good take that never existed in hindsight. Can you tell I’m struggling to describe this?
This weird retrofitting of a non-existent take to gain Hindsight Bias happens more often than you think. Reminds me of when Keith Law was caught doctoring his old MLB Prospect Lists for ESPN, which then reminds me of one of my favorite Monty Python’s Holy Grail moments: The Black Knight, his legs and arms savagely rent from his body, screaming as his assailant moves past him. “Oh, oh I see. Running away, eh?! You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what’s coming to you! I’ll bite your legs off!!”
You can’t run away from a bad take, you simply must own it…unless you invent past takes and spend your time convincing others that they always existed. This is the Caesar Souze of blurbs.
Q&Q
AJ Pollock went 2-for-4 with a triple and a run scored on Thursday in the Dodgers’ win over the Padres.
Pollock tripled against Padres righty Yu Darvish and eventually crossed the plate on a sacrifice fly from Cody Bellinger in the fourth inning. He also singled with two outs in the sixth inning to cap off the multi-hit performance. The 33-year-old veteran outfielder has put together an impressive season at the dish, slashing .305/.356/.527 with 44 runs scored, 16 home runs, 55 RBI and eight stolen bases across 362 plate appearances.
Source: Rotoedgesportsworld.com
An impressive season at the dish without mentioning what would be a career-high .347 BABIP. I need that context, it’s tasty, and I want to eat it. Meanwhile, we have yet another game recap. From a fantasy perspective, what do we get from learning when he had his second single? Why record that he did it with two outs? Is this for people looking for parlays? Who in the holy heck is putting down bets that AJ Pollock is going to get a single with two outs? Is this the blurb world’s version of clickbait? “HE HIT A TWO-OUT SINGLE IN THE SIXTH INNING…AND YOU’LL NEVER GUESS WHAT HAPPENED NEXT!” How did I use the internet for nigh on two decades, never to realize I could be a millionaire making fake ads with pirated pictures of women? Ah yes, human decency. We all forget that one from time to time…
Town Crier
Jonathan India went 2-for-4 with a home run, three RBI, and two runs scored on Thursday versus the Brewers.
The 24-year-old has been fantastic in his rookie campaign slashing .275/.388/.464 with 17 home runs, 22 doubles, 59 RBI, and eight stolen bases over 407 at-bats. India is the clear front runner to win the National League Rookie of the Year award.
Source: Rotoedgeworldsports.com
I read this and scratched my head, squinted, put my hands on my hips, pursed my lips, and then slightly tilted my previously-scratched head in befuddlement. India has been really good, but he stunk in the first few months of the season. No way the dude is the “clear front runner” for NL ROY. Then I sighed and typed in “odds on NL ROY” and was taken to several sports betting sites with this paraphrased sentence. I get that Trevor Rogers has missed time, and India has been hot, but mercy do you know who votes for Rookie of the Year? Why, it’s the Baseball Writers of America! The self-same folks who openly accept sports gambling money spilling into MLB’s coffers while also blacklisting Pete Rose from the Hall of Fame? No no no, that can’t be right. How about the self-same folks who helped sell columns, newspapers, Sportcenter, etc. and remained helpfully ignorant during the homer-happy Steroid Era who now insist on blocking Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, etc from the HOF, whilst churlishly insisting they must abide by the very morals and ethics they eschewed while accepting their cut of the grift from the MLB?
These self-same people aren’t great! Tangent aside, I don’t like blurb sites citing the betting arm of themselves to proclaim a lock on an arbitrary award decided on by some notoriously self-serving tree stumps. You maybe just jinxed Jonathan India.
Till next time, eager blurbers and blurbees!
