Does there exist a sportswriter anywhere on this planet worse that Tim Panaccio? Well, as the saying goes, anything is possible. However, like UFOs and bigfoot, evidence of anyone being worse than Panaccio is hard to come by and anecdotal at best. The evidence of Panaccio's ineptitude, however, is easy to come by in print almost every day.
Taking a look at his two columns in the December 13th Philadelphia Inquirer, providing just a glimpse at how bad this guy is. In the article entitled "Renberg Returns to Flyers" Not a few inches in we come to the statement "Clarke {...] had misjudged Gratton's ability [...] when he gave the Group II restricted free agent a five-year, $16.5 million contract and a $9 million signing bonus." Reading this statement, "16.5 million and a $9 million dollar signing bonus" it would be easy to assume that the signing bonus was in addition to the contract given to Gratton. Of course this is not the case. It was a 16.5 million contract including a 9 million dollar signing bonus, not in addition to - as is the commonly held definition of the word "and".
Soon after that we come to the statement "[Gratton] was averaging 18 minutes of ice time per game..." According to the NHL's own numbers, Gratton averaged less that 14 and a half minutes per hame (14.4 min) Where does Panaccio get his numbers? That is a good question. Exactly two games into the 1998-99 season, after John Vanbiesbrouck had given up precisely one goal, Tim Pannacio listed Vanbiesbrouck's GAA as 1.99. Dividing 1 goal by 2 games is not that difficult a task. Does Panaccio make his numbers up? I would not go so far as to suggest that, but the evidence does beg the question.
As an aside, away from the numbers, Panaccio neglects to mention the hard work after practive that has had all his teammates supporting and pulling for him. Does Tim Panaccio have an axe to grind? If yes, then with who?
For more insight into that question, let's look at the December 13th article "Flyers make goalie battle no contest." In this article we have a seemingly straightforward recap of the previous nights hockey game. Yet, when mentioning Toronto goaltender Curtis Joseph, Panaccio writes: "Joseph, who thought he was going to the Flyers in last summer's free-agent goalie sweepstakes, was stunned twice in the first period last night." Why was this unattributed, out-of-the-blue statement made? The fact has been belabored that Curtis Joseph had publically stated, while he was a free agent, his desire to play for his childhood idols, the Toronto Maple Leafs. Does Tim Panaccio want to make it seem as if Joseph was available to the Flyers had they made him an offer? If that was his intent, the fact that signing Joseph was demonstrably impossible leads to a rather pointing idictment of Tim Panaccio's motives.
These two articles are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Panaccio's biased, unreliable and often just plain false reporting. The fans of the Philadelphia Flyers deserve a lot better.
-Ek9
Posted on Dec 18, 1998, 1:35 PM from IP address 216.65.146.26