WasWatching.com

What's with the Pavano and Wright cracks in the mock Hughes post? That's an uncalled for cheap shot. You ventured into Red Sox fan territory with that one.

Lighten up, Francis.

Yeah, Steve, why would we ever think you didn't like Hughes in a totally petty, personal way? It's not like you flat-out mock him or anything.

The irony of a fan blasting a player -- someone who actually participates with the team -- for his blog (under the grounds he hasn't "earned" the right) is absolutely head-spinning.

You seriously need to chill out and maybe not contemplate the end of the world each day.

Steve step away from the ledge!!

j/k

Man, what would have happened if I HAD included the bit about Hughes looking like Rube Baker, the catcher from the 'Major League' movies? THEN, I guess you guys would have been really ticked.

Really, it's just an attempt at some fun. I guess I should have picked a different idol to mock. My bad.

Seriously, this is my least favorite post in WasWatching history. When I think about WasWatching.com, going forward, I'm forced to think: What will he be like the rest of the season? Will most of his posts be like this one? Or will he behave like he did at some arbitrary previous time?

What happens, if, come May 1, most of Steve's posts are ripping the Yankees he doesn't like (Mussina, A-Rod, Hughes) while other players (Melky, IPK) are free from criticism? I guess a lot of that depends on how the team as a whole is doing...

...Steve, you criticizing Hughes for having predictable posts is very much ironic.

Wow...he DOES look just like the catcher from Major League. Let's hope he doesn't start blogging about former Playboy playmates.

Steve, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you would rather have Hughes fail-and you be right- than the Yankees having a young stud pitcher. Maybe I'm wrong, but couldn't the burial of Hughes at least waited until the regular season? I know you don't wear Yankee blinders or whatever, but it's getting old.

Wow Steve. This is truly a new low for you. This was petty, crude, thoughtless, and simply downright mean.

It's a shameful Yankees fan that outright mocks players on their team who have done absolutely nothing wrong - and quite a lot right. Steve, you are a shameful Yankees fan, and this was uncalled for. I think an apology, to your readers, is in order.

I guess I should have picked a different idol to mock. My bad.
--------

That's the whole point. You don't treat anyone else like Hughes. With no one does this venom come close. The only comparable is Pavano, and why anyone would have Pavano and Hughes in the same despised breath is beyond me.

But you know what? Having said that, it's fine if you don't like Hughes. I don't appreciate the petty attacks, but whatever works for you is fine. Just admit to it already. Just flat-out say you don't like him, that he pisses you off, and that's why you have such fun beating on him. It would be a lot more honest to admit it than repeating this Yankee-icon/I-don't-wear-blinders righteousness.

Steve demands excellence

It's ok, Steve Lombardi. I'm sure Phil Hughes appreciates your mockery.

You're free to make potshots at Phil right now, but you should never have the opportunity to celebrate when Phil becomes successful. And he will. I know you hate Cashman but you transferring it on to Phil is just simply in bad taste.

P.S. Every well informed fan knows more than to take spring training stats seriously. Maybe you should consider dropping the Zeal in "Yankeeland Zealot" tag and replacing it with "Idi"

Steve...remember all those people who said, in answering your survey, that their opinions about this blog had changed in the past 6 months? I'm guessing it's stuff like this that lead them to that answer. I know that's why I responded that way. You used to post really intelligent analysis and insight, but more and more often you're stooping to fan-boy name calling, with Hughes the frequent target. It's a shame. You seem like a really intelligent guy. You'd think you'd be above that`sort of thing.

You know what I find amazing? It’s this: At times, *some* people like to get on me about this blog being “too negative” or “all doom and gloom.” They moan about it, in fact. And, when I try to post something that’s sort of tongue in cheek, and meant in a light-hearted way, an attempt at humor, if you will, many of those same *some* people now bitch about that effort.

Be serious, and you’re chicken little. Be funny, and you’re not a true Yankees fan, etc.

For *some* people, I guess they just can’t be pleased.

Steve, it's not the method, it's the target. You constantly call people who defend Hughes as wearing "Yankee-Blinders" while being guilty of wearing blinders yourself. You even admit in the post that Hughes' start was better than his previous two, but when you lead with a dig, even in the form of a "humorous" fake blog entry from Hughes, it's going to rub people the wrong way, because you consistently paint him in a negative light. Maybe if you actually looked at his start objectively, and posted your analysis, the response would have been different. I mean, he did strike out six in five innings, but you don't even mention that.

Com'on, everything I wrote in that pretend blog entry was based on actual entries that Hughes made to his blog. I only tweaked them a bit. Personally, I think even Hughes would have to laugh at it - because it's so reality based.

Well, I thought it was pretty funny...

Again...I'm not saying it's the method. It didn't say it wasn't funny. I'm saying it's the target. Yet another anti-Hughes post, albeit one with an attempt at humor in it, is going to rub a lot of visitors here the wrong way, because you're constantly posting in the negative when referencing him.

C'mon people, if you saw this on deadspin you'd be forwarding it to friends and saying it's funny. Maybe it's just that this is one of your "home" sites and don't want young potential phenoms that everyones a little bit worried about (b/c OHMYGOD there's EVERYTHING riding on it (that goes double for me b/c I have Hughes signed for FOUR FRICKIN YEARS in my fantasy league)) being mocked? I have problems with Steve (intellectually, not personally) and his sometimes specious statistics selection when he's doing the Cashman bash, but I have no problem with this post. Maybe it's b/c I have Hughes' blog on my google feed, and it cracks me up in the ways that Steve highlights. I know it's hard to lighten up when the Red Sox are ALREADY one game up on us, but...

For those who get the joke, thanks.

bfriley76 - This was negative?

http://www.waswatching.com/archives/2008/03/phil_hughes_see.html

and this was negative?

http://www.waswatching.com/archives/2008/03/hughes_remains.html

and this was negative?

http://www.waswatching.com/archives/2008/02/borden_hughes_r.html

and this was negative?

http://www.waswatching.com/archives/2007/10/october_7th_vs_1.html

Once again, people see and remember what they want to and they ignore what doesn't fit into their case. I am not "constantly posting in the negative when referencing him." I try and be fair and post both sides of the story - good and bad. It's just that the FOPH (Fans of Phil Hughes) only care when someone dares to say less than glowing things all the time, I suppose.