Avid Hawks fans may have noticed an Internet kerfluffle over John Scott's performance on Friday.
He got an assist on a goal he had nothing to do with, didn't fall down, got into a fight that served no purpose benefitting the Hawks, then the Chicago Tribune's Chris Kuc voted him the Second Star of the game. He followed this up with an entire game story in the next day's paper about what a difference Scott made.
I couldn't help but feel that this was a thumbing of the nose at all Hawks bloggers. I and many others have showered Kuc's and the other beat writers' twitter feeds with questions and criticisms of Scott and the fawning coverage the big doofus gets. We want to know why he keeps playing when he doesn't do anything. The people with the team won't ask, and they defend Scott because he happens to be a great person and makes their job easier.
But part of their job is to separate the player from the person. I and other bloggers don't have that problem. John Scott might not be a detr...