Pulitzer stuff if the timestamp wasn't this late. Back in the Bronx zoo days, the info flowed freely in real time. Yet in the Twitter age, this stuff sat on the shelf until they Monday morning quarterbacked from a safe distance at a time that doesn't risk press conference tension for those now wagging their tongues.
Well, it helps that he is not the beat writer and can afford to burn people. Reminds me of the Bob Hohler piece on chicken and beer. I hated the Hohler piece since it was an obvious hatchet job from the Troika placed in the paper that they owned and typical of the way no one leaves the Red Sox with a name intact. Maybe this is the knife in the back of Williams as a favor to the Lerners, but the rest of the series will be less focused on the Williams problem and more on the overall team's failure. Frankly, it was tough to write them off before they were eliminated, so I can see the timing from that perspective.
Rather than saying it is a short-coming of the article, I think that, if there is a failure to report this during the year, it is more on beat folks, Boz, and Kilgore. But there were hints of almost everything before, too. The problem was, when the beat folks would ask a q at a press conference about a specific decision or example, they'd get "standard decision" or some tripe about "you don't know what data we had behind the decision" and they would have to print that, too. it takes time to piece a piece like Svrulga's together. It is not a thing a beat writer can do on a deadline.
