Quality of Articles Going Way Downhill

[Vanimal46]

I’m sorry in advance for putting a certain author here on blast. In the last week, we’ve had articles claiming because 3 players (the same names we read Star Tribune commenters make) left the organization in 5 years, the Twins have a scouting issue. Another article discussing lessons learned from the 2017 deadline, where no lessons were actually discussed. Just a quote from the FO. And the embarrassment of an article calling out Donaldson being the most unlikeable player in Twins history. 
 

I came to Twins Daily in previous years to read in-depth analysis to debunk lazy takes that you see in the Star Tribune comment section. Now I can’t tell the difference between this excellent website and the Strib. 
 

P.S. the Donaldson article is getting ratioed to death on Twitter. As it should. I doubt that’s the type of engagement and reputation y’all are looking for online. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

Thanks for the input, Van. I really mean that. I'm making sure all the owners get a look at this thread.

[Vanimal46]

1 minute ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Thanks for the input, Van. I really mean that. I'm making sure all the owners get a look at this thread.

You know I’m saying this out of love and passion for the site. I will consume every word of an article if the author dove in and looked at every prospect that left the organization and break it down to less than 1 WAR, 1-3 WAR, or 3+ WAR to show if we really have a scouting issue, for example. As an outsider looking in, it appears the focus is on quantity of articles per day, not quality of articles. And that’s been really disappointing to see. 

[Squirrel]

It's a difficult job to write ... to identify what you want to write about, put some thought and research/analysis behind it, and be brave enough to put it out there for all to see. It's a tough job and I recognize that and appreciate the output of most all of the writers on this site because I can see the effort that went into it, whether or not I agree with it. It's something that I am not brave enough to do. And this site has done a terrific job putting together writers who do their due diligence and put out thoughtful and though-provoking articles; it's what sets it apart from the STrib comments, from Twitter, from other 'run-of-the-mill', 'fly-by-night' sites. However, the Donaldson article put out today (yesterday) lacked all of what I have come to expect from the output at this site ... thoughtful, due-diligence, effort. There is a huge difference between putting out something that is thought-provoking to inspire response and discussion than putting out something that is nothing more than a Twitter 'post and run' kind of thing. I'm sorry if that seems harsh, but that's what it is. I prefer the 'quality over quantity' that most every writer on this site follows. Articles like the recent Donaldson article, well ... that is something you expect to see in the forums from some random poster (and honestly, most of our posters do better than that) ... not a front-page article.

[John Bonnes]

I'll share my honest reaction to it when alerted to it: "It's going to upset a bunch of Twins fans, but it's not unfair." 

I didn't think it was poorly written. It points out that he's fiery and this sticky crusade has absolutely been a distraction and potentially fuel for the Sox. Plus, Cody did a decent job of bringing up a bunch of other names that Twins fans have found unlikeable and doing a comparison. It was fairly comprehensive.

 

It's also a risky story to write. It's easy to write positive stories. Easy to throw stats out without much of an opinion. But this is totally subjective, and likely to make some people angry. It's the type of story that probably goes better with some humor mixed in, but the opinion was fairly balanced. 

 

Cody is calling it like he sees it, and it wasn't an over-the-top. It just wasn't kind. We embrace being civil to each other in the forums, but expressing disappointment on the players is fair game. It's not our job to make chicken salad out of chicken crap. 

[Squirrel]

6 minutes ago, John Bonnes said:

I'll share my honest reaction to it when alerted to it: "It's going to upset a bunch of Twins fans, but it's not unfair." 

I didn't think it was poorly written. It points out that he's fiery and this sticky crusade has absolutely been a distraction and potentially fuel for the Sox. Plus, Cody did a decent job of bringing up a bunch of other names that Twins fans have found unlikeable and doing a comparison. It was fairly comprehensive.

 

It's also a risky story to write. It's easy to write positive stories. Easy to throw stats out without much of an opinion. But this is totally subjective, and likely to make some people angry. It's the type of story that probably goes better with some humor mixed in, but the opinion was fairly balanced. 

 

Cody is calling it like he sees it, and it wasn't an over-the-top. It just wasn't kind. We embrace being civil to each other in the forums, but expressing disappointment on the players is fair game. It's not our job to make chicken salad out of chicken crap. 

I can't disagree more ... especially the clickbait title. Of all times? Really? There was NO THOUGHT into that ... it was for nothing more than to garner clicks. Hit and run. Come on, John ... you are better than that.

[TheLeviathan]

The article on self scouting was hollow on analysis and felt like a regurgitated bleacher report slideshow.

The trade deadline article was literally incoherent.  There was no clear thesis or argument and the title was misleading.  It would fail a fifth grade essay rubric.

And Donaldson?  Woof.  Bad thesis.  Bad arguments.  Lazy nonsense.

Van is right.

[Vanimal46]

17 minutes ago, John Bonnes said:

I'll share my honest reaction to it when alerted to it: "It's going to upset a bunch of Twins fans, but it's not unfair." 

I didn't think it was poorly written. It points out that he's fiery and this sticky crusade has absolutely been a distraction and potentially fuel for the Sox. Plus, Cody did a decent job of bringing up a bunch of other names that Twins fans have found unlikeable and doing a comparison. It was fairly comprehensive.

 

It's also a risky story to write. It's easy to write positive stories. Easy to throw stats out without much of an opinion. But this is totally subjective, and likely to make some people angry. It's the type of story that probably goes better with some humor mixed in, but the opinion was fairly balanced. 

 

Cody is calling it like he sees it, and it wasn't an over-the-top. It just wasn't kind. We embrace being civil to each other in the forums, but expressing disappointment on the players is fair game. It's not our job to make chicken salad out of chicken crap. 

Reading Dan Hayes’ article today is a night and day difference than the article on the front page of TD. These were tactics used to rally the team, and it’s not a distraction. 
 

Until the overblown Giolito situation, there wasn’t a peep talking about Donaldson being a problem in the clubhouse. 

[MMMordabito]

Bump

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, MMMordabito said:

Bump

Go on......?

[Squirrel]

And then we have this:

https://twinsdaily.com/forums/topic/55815-should-byron-buxton-shift-to-designated-hitter/?_rid=7

This kind of tripe is a blight to TD. Seriously. Ugh, just ugh. This writer shouldn't be allowed to 'churn 'em out' on a daily basis like this. It's a slap in the face to all the good, legitimate writers TD has. Just awful.

[Craig Arko]

8 hours ago, Squirrel said:

And then we have this:

https://twinsdaily.com/forums/topic/55815-should-byron-buxton-shift-to-designated-hitter/?_rid=7

This kind of tripe is a blight to TD. Seriously. Ugh, just ugh. This writer shouldn't be allowed to 'churn 'em out' on a daily basis like this. It's a slap in the face to all the good, legitimate writers TD has. Just awful.

I kinda disagree with this point. Shouldn’t be allowed? Let ‘em write whatever they want and we can just laugh at them (a lot) or ignore it. As tripe one reads on a daily basis goes, this is pretty mild stuff.

[Squirrel]

1 hour ago, Craig Arko said:

I kinda disagree with this point. Shouldn’t be allowed? Let ‘em write whatever they want and we can just laugh at them (a lot) or ignore it. As tripe one reads on a daily basis goes, this is pretty mild stuff.

I should clarify ... I expect better than clickbait from contributing writers. I expect better than that from the site. It's your right to disagree, but if I could put certain writers on ignore, I would. And then to feature clickbait on the front page? Yeah, ugh. I'm allowed to have that opinion as you are to disagree with it.