This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

I thought it was just okay. by tdiddy07

It had its moments, and I agree that that was a highlight of the book. But it’s two books melded together. And each was just okay to me. I try to read one baseball book every spring. I had fairly high hopes for this one. But this was down the list for me. I thought Summer of ‘49 to be much better storytelling as a more direct comparison of the first half of Kahn’s book. Otherwise, I’d take collections of Angel, Plimpton, and others as more compelling collections of vignettes. It’s perhaps unfair to compare it to Ball Four, but I would recommend that much before Kahn’s.

Next year I might pick up something by the Spaceman. That should be interesting.