Sam Mellinger, Part II: Press access and more
In this crazy world of millions of whippersnappers blogging from their homes instead of press boxes, the importance of access is always a big issue. I have had Drew Magary’s column on the topic bookmarked since the day he wrote it.
[Rick] Reilly assumes that, if you haven’t been in a locker room, if you’ve never had access, then you can’t possibly have any sort of valuable insight to offer on sports. This is wrong, of course. I’m pretty sure Bill James didn’t set foot into a locker room before changing the fundamental nature of baseball scouting forever.
The quote goes on, but I try to keep the language here family-friendly. This week, since I had the ear of a writer who has access (but who also blogs), I thought I’d ask. I figured it was very possible that Magary (and Will Leitch, and I, and everyone else who reads/writes sports blogs) is biased against press access. Below, Sam Mellinger of the Kansas City Star addresses the issue of press access, and the “blogs vs. traditional media” issue.
If you missed it, here’s Part I. Read on for Part II:
Minda: What sports blogs do you read regularly? Describe their importance (if any) in shaping your own views of the sports world.
The Big Lead is the only one I check more than once a day. I also periodically check Deadspin, Joe Posnanski’s blog (he is my journalism hero and very fortunately for me a colleague at the Star), Kevin Kaduk’s Big League Stew (a friend and former co-worker), Slate magazine (probably not a blog), Sports Media Guide, (message board, not a blog), DC Sports Bog (probably the best newspaper-run sports blog), the LA Times’ collective sports blog, and lots of baseball-centric blogs that focus both on the Royals and baseball in general.
Their importance? Depends. Lots of times irrelevant, lots of times very important. In a lot of ways, just like reading traditional media.
The Big Lead is the one I check more than once a day because I feel like it does a pretty good job aggregating a lot of what’s going on in the sports and blog world. It’s also entertaining, and let’s be honest, I have a silly job writing about sports so entertaining is important. There’s a Royals centric blog I check more than once a day during the season, too, for the same reason. I suppose every blog I’m interested in falls into one of two categories: 1. gives a point of view or perspective that’s original and unique (Rany on the Royals is probably the best example in the Royals’ blog world) or 2. provides one-stop-shopping for links to interesting stories and trends.
Do you think people need press access to be good/analytical/thoughtful/ useful sports writers?
Um, yes and no. Usually, but not always. I think most of the ones without press access who are able to provide good analysis and thought do so through statistics and numbers and objective thinking. Rany’s a great example of this, Baseball Prospectus is another.
But I do think that to provide full context, full perspective, and more than just a numerical representation of what’s going on, you do need to talk with the people you’re analyzing, you do need to show your face, exchange ideas, and learn everything you can.
Baseball is what I do, at least at the moment, so I’m all too familiar with the underground war that’s been going on for years between those who believe strictly in statistical analysis vs those who believe strictly in more traditional scouting analysis. The best baseball minds, I believe, see the value in both. On a big scale, the Boston Red Sox’s emergence as the best organization in baseball is proof of this. They do the best job of combining statistical and scouting analysis, hiring great scouts and also Bill James, the father of statistical analysis.
I guess the best way to put it: those without press access are limited, just like those with press access who ignore the newer methods of analysis are limited. There’s a ton of information available out there for free, done well by people who do it for free, so the only way those of us who want to get paid for it can earn our money is by doing it better and using the advantages that we’re lucky enough to have.
For me, in the baseball world, that means being able to bridge the gap between traditional and non-traditional analysis. That means asking players and executives questions that others aren’t able to. That means challenging them at times, praising them at times, pointing out their flaws at times, going to the places where others aren’t allowed to do the parts of this job that we’re lucky enough to be able to do exclusively and well.
Many thanks again to Sam for taking the time to share his insights. I’m sure I can examine many snippets from this interview in the future and expand on the ideas he brings up, but those posts will have to wait until another time. For now, it’s time to sleep!