Wednesday, July 15, 2009

0 comments Joe Morgan Chats Very Consistently But Otherwise Isn't Very Smart

It was a good All-Star game last night and it was set up perfectly for the hometown boy Ryan Howard to be the hero and in typical MVP fashion he struck out on a 58 foot curveball in the dirt with runners on 2nd and 3rd. Congratulations Ryan Howard, now when the Dodgers and Red Sox play in the World Series the Red Sox will sweep the Dodgers and celebrate after Game 4 in Los Angeles instead of Boston!

It's another week, and I have another JoeChat for the world to feast it's eyes upon. I had so much fun doing this last week, I wanted to do it again and again, so I will. As usual we have the normal FJMorgan plants who use the word "consistently" a lot in their questions, which is always fun to read before reading how Joe answered the question. I always felt semi-bad for Joe, just in case he was getting the jokes that others play on him by using his favorite catchphrases in questions posed to him, but after reading JemeHill's chat, I don't anymore. Her "fans" hate her. If you read the chat, it started off innocently and turned into people outright challenging her on her opinions. If I had a heart, I would care.

Speaking of heart, grittiness, Gary Sheffield and not actually answering questions posed to him, let's start the JoeChat.

Buzzmaster (11:00 AM)

We're getting Joe Morgan right now!

Thanks Buzzmaster for creating the certain buzz a Joe Morgan chat brings to the thousands of people who enjoy posing a question to an expert and not exactly getting an answer of any type to it. Joe thinks all the questions posed are hypothetical questions that have no real answer.

I just created a word to describe what Joe has. Accurastataphobia. It is the fear of accurate statistics that may prove a person wrong. That's what he has, hence his fear of computers because computers consist primarily of numbers that can prove any person wrong, no matter how smart or consistently consistent that person may be.

For Joe, computers are the ultimate evil. They have never played baseball so they don't understand how great the Big Red Machine and Dave Concepcion were, they just base their opinions on numbers which do not come from direct observation, which is Joe's favorite form of information gathering. He did not believe in the Holocaust until he actually went to Europe and saw a concentration camp, even then he did not see any prisoners so he was a little suspicious.

Accurastataphobia. That's what he has.

JM: Looking forward to next week's all-star game. It's a great time of the season. It gives a break in the season for the players and the fans. It's a great time.

More importantly there anything "great" about it?

Matt (Jacksonville)

Joe, do you think the Cubs will be more consistent with Aramis Ramirez back?

Here's the first question and here is the first FJMorgan baiter. Good job Matt. FJMorgan baiters are a consistent bunch.

JM: I definitely think they will be. He has been the key to their offense being consistent as far as I'm concerned. He's the most productive hitter on that team the last few years. With him back, I think they'll do beter.

I don't think it even matters to me that Joe is right. I think it is his overuse of the word "consistent" that makes me think he is wrong. Ramirez has been a productive hitter but Derrek Lee and Alfonso Soriano are not too far behind. I find it interesting Joe doesn't think the struggles of Soriano have anything to do with the Cubs struggles.

Ed (Denver)

Hey, Joe. I was wondering your thoughts on Marquis getting into the all-star game? Don't you think his 11 wins are the product of run support and not that that he's a good pitcher?

JM: The name of the game, people always want to forget, for pitchers is wins and losses. If you beat a team 1-0, as he did recently, or 5-4, it doesn't matter.

When it comes to the team's wins and losses, this is 100% correct. What is 100% incorrect, and this is what people who are idiots always want to forget, the name of the game for pitchers individually is not wins and losses because there is a whole other half called "offense" a pitcher can't control...unless the pitcher plans on playing in the National League and driving all the runs in himself. If you pitch for the team that lost 1-0 and you have a 4-11 record with a 2.01 ERA then you are a better pitcher than the guy who won with his team winning 5-4 and he has a 10-4 and a 3.87 ERA. The name of my game is common sense and Joe should use a little to figure this out.

I'm not so much for a guy that has a low ERA and a losing record. That tells me that the other pitcher pitched better than he did, because that team scored more runs.

Holy freaking Christ, I did not just read that sentence. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, that is not what that means. Not at all. You should be fired immediately for this argument, seriously, this should be a fireable offense.

When a guy has a low ERA and a losing record that tells me the other pitcher did not necessarily pitch better but the other team's offense scored more runs, which actually is the name of the game. Hitting and pitching are two COMPLETELY separate things. Much like how a quarterback in football, like say Drew Brees, should not be rated based completely on his team's performance because there is a whole defense thing that NFL teams also have to play. We don't base Drew Brees' individual performance based on the team's record because that would be stupid to do. It's the same principle in baseball. Simply because pitchers are graded on wins and losses doesn't mean that statistic is the end-all-be-all that determines if a pitcher has pitched well or not.

I think Joe Morgan is just baiting people like me with responses like this, there is no way he is actually this stupid and ignorant about baseball. He can't truly believe a guy like Matt Cain, who is pitching better this year than in the past, is THAT MUCH of a better pitcher this year because he is 10-2, as opposed to him being 15-30 over the past 2 seasons when he pitched well but got little run support.

I wish that MLB would get rid of wins and losses completely for pitchers. It will never happen but at least it would cause idiots like Joe to have to use a different and more accurate measurement to determine which players are good pitchers, because wins and losses are not an accurate measurement of a pitcher's skill. Is Tim Wakefield really that much better of a pitcher this year because he has 11 wins? Or is this a product of the run support he receives considering his ERA is almost exactly at his career average?

Jason Marquis is a good pitcher. He's not a shut down pitcher, he's not a No. 1, but he deserves to be in the All-Star game.

Based on what? Your proclaiming him being a good pitcher? That really creepy mustache he is rocking? I have seen Jason Marquis pitch several dozen times and I assure you Mr. Morgan, he is not a good pitcher. He has wins because he has gotten good run support and has a 0.270 BABiP (the league average is 0.300, so he is getting a little bit lucky), so morons like you and your friends think he is pitching better.

Brian (Irvine,CA)

I'm a Giants fan and I hope Mr. Sabean will make a trade for 2B or 1B? Do you agree with me?

JM: They need another bat. Another consistent bat. Kunfu Panda is their most consistent hitter right now.

Kunfu Panda? I can't believe they call Pablo Sandoval that in San Francisco. I understood it when I researched it but I think Joe Morgan should probably refer to him by his name. I would bet $50 Joe Morgan doesn't know his real name.

Matt (Boston)

Is Tulo ever going to become a consistent, power-hitting SS?

Another FJMorgan plant. They are like the Big Red Machine when it comes to questions.

JM: He had such a great rookie year and they gave him a long term contract and he hasn't performed well since. I think the jury's still out on how good he can be, will be...But I'm not sure he's going to be that guy. We'll have to wait and see.

I did a five second search on the Internet and it turns out Tulowitzki is having his best year as a professional in many categories, except in the category of RBI's which any reasonable person knows is a product of having men on base in front of you. It took 5 seconds to do this and my computer is pretty slow. Also he is on pace to hit a career high in home runs. He is on pace for 30 HRs, I would say that he is a power hitting SS now.

Nick (Boston, MA)

Who do you feel should be the starter for the AL at the All-Star Game?

JM: I would say either Greinke or Hernandez...The game seems to be now more about buzz. I think you'd get a bigger buzz with a guy like Hernandez because he's a power pitcher.

Apparently Zack Greinke is not a power pitcher. He has 129 strikeouts this year, while Hernandez has 121 strikeouts. Greinke throws his fastball at 94 MPH and Hernandez throws his at 96 MPH. There is a huge difference in those two speeds, especially at the major league level, but I would still classify Greinke as a power pitcher especially since there was an article in SI saying he is actually trying to throw slower. So Joe's statement that Felix Hernandez should start because he is a power pitcher, inferring that Greinke is not, is incorrect.

These are the types of things I as a baseball fan know and take the time to look up. Why can't Joe do the same? We should expect this from the lead analyst on ESPN. He should be able to stump us on questions, rather than just answer randomly with what his bizarre mind thinks is the answer.

Matt (St. Paul, MN)

Joe, who's your midseason AL MVP? I'm just assuming that Pujols is the NL candidate?

JM: There's no doubt that he's the NL MVP. The American League is a little more complicated. Originally, I would look to someone from Boston, because they have the best team, but I don't see anyone.

Because it obviously makes sense that the most valuable player in the league will come from the best team in the American League. That's why it is called the Most Valuable Player on the Best Team in the League award and not the Most Valuable Player award. If you can't find anyone on Boston who deserves the award then the sportswriters should just not vote for the AL MVP this year. There are no other valuable players in the league.

Right now, Justin Morneau, Miguel Cabrera are having good seasons. Their teams have a chance at winning.

There is no prerequisite that says a team has to have a chance at winning for a player to be named MVP. It's for the most valuable player in the league, that's it.

Justin Morneau isn't even the MVP on his own team at this point:

Morneau: .311/.390/.575, 21 HR 70 RBI's in 88 games.
Mauer: .373/.447/.662, 15 HR 49 RBI's in 64 games.

Miguel Cabrera is a possibility. I will give him that but chalk his mention by Joe up to luck when he just started naming baseball players he remembers were good last year.

And I like Tori Hunter because of his defense.

Even when Joe is right he is wrong. Hunter is still great in centerfield, like he always has been, but what makes him an MVP candidate this year is his numbers batting.

But thre are a lot of other guys having good seasons as well.

They probably don't deserve a mention because they are not on a good team, so they don't even qualify for the they can spell the word "there" and Joe is jealous.

K (philly)
Were you ever involved in a game like last nights Phils/Reds ?

He is talking about the 22-1 beat down.

JM: No. Sparky would never let us to beat someone that badly. As an example, I drove in 7 runs in the first few innings and we were up 12-1 or something like that and he took me out of the game. I looked at the 8-9 inning last night and the regulars were still playing.

I would love to fact check this story, but I looked online and couldn't find any example of this. I hesitate to say Joe is lying because I may not have looked in the right place. If someone has better Google skills than me, please fill me in.

In this case, Joe needs to understand that Utley and Howard were removed from the game very early. As Joe should probably know, which of course he doesn't, is the Phillies could not remove every regular and let every player on the bench to play because there are only 5 guys on the bench and if they get put in the game and something incredibly bizarre happens, they are stuck playing. Joe would never consider this though. The Phillies also carry 3 catchers on the active roster, so they really don't have too much flexibility to substitute in rare situations such as this. This is something else Joe to consider before answering.

Bawb (Fairview, UT)

Who do you think is the biggest snub from the All Star rosters?

JM: I don't know if the word snub is the right word. They added one more player to each team. It used to be a 25 man roster and it was tough. Now it's more of an exhibition and they're adding more players.

Yes, it is more of an exhibition opposed to when it used to count in the standings? I know what Joe is saying but the All Star Game has always been an exhibition, it's just the players used to take it a little more seriously. As I said last year, it just so happens World Series homefield advantage is at stake, which actually makes the game a little bit less of an exhibition. If all that just made sense.

I'm surprised that No. 1 Ian Kinsler was not on the team. He's leading his team in RBI and at the time his team was in first place.

I want to remind everyone that Joe Morgan has a Hall of Fame vote and this is how he is deciding who he thinks should be in the All Star Game, imagine the clusterfuck that goes on in his head when it comes time to vote for the Hall of Fame.

RBI's are a function of having players on base in front of you and his team being in first place should have zero bearing on his candidacy for the All-Star Game. I would actually be more impressed if Kinsler had a ton of RBI's on a bad team.

This is the All-Star game and the best couple at each position deserve to go. But they have four 1B, which means another position someone got squeezed out. Kung Fu Panda in San Francisco deserves to be there.

I'm not kidding. Just call him Pablo Sandoval. I would bet $100 now that Joe does not even know Sandoval's real name, but he knows he should be in the All Star Game.

Dan (FL)

Do you think GMs will think twice about giving Japanese pitchers big money after seeing most of them don't live up to expectations? Thanks.

JM: You asked about pitchers, but what about Fukudome and other position players? I don't think you can compare Japanese baseball to Major League Baseball. Fukudome is a platoon player at best right now. Matsui was Godzilla and was supposed to hit 40-50 home runs.

I can't believe the media may have overhyped these guys from Japan. I don't believe it.

I don't think anyone really expected Matsui to come to American and hit 40-50 home runs. That seems a bit unrealistic, especially if you factor in he was 29 years old when he played his first game in the majors. I think Matsui has performed fairly well in the major leagues and he is still playing pretty well for a guy who is 35 years old.

But hey, where are those 40-50 home runs? He's not Godzilla, he's more like the 1998 movie version of "Godzilla," both were in New York and both were big busts and consisted mostly of hype (raises his hand and searches for someone to high five, but there is no one else in his mom's attic).

You hear that Matsui? You are not a real Godzilla, you are the shitty movie version of "Godzilla."

No one has lived up to expectations, with the exception of Ichiro. It's not just Japanese players, it's foreign players overall.

Yes, Manny Ramirez, Pedro Martinez, Johan Santana, Carlos Delgado, Miguel Cabrera, Felx Hernandez (do I have to go on?), you are all major disappointments as foreign players here in America. Go home to where you come from!

(Apparently Furman Bisher is ghost writing this portion of the chat for Joe)

In some cases, we've done the same thing with some of the Cuban players. This latest left handed pitcher to defect is supposed to be the next Randy Johnson, but I don't know how we can say that until he plays against MLB players.

How about when you say, "we've done the same thing with some of the Cuban players," you actually mention some of the Cuban players you consider as failures? Or you could just continue to speak in generalities, as you have for pretty much your entire broadcasting career, in a futile attempt to mask the fact you know little to nothing about the game of baseball.

If you are going to mention the pitcher who "is supposed to be the next Randy Johnson" look his name up on the Internet, it tends to give you a lot more credibility. His name is Aroldis Chapman and that took me 13 seconds to look up on the Internet.

Burt (IL)

Do you think Piniella was fair with Milton Bradley? I see Youkilis blowing up all the time and nobody disciplines him.

JM: Make no mistake about it, Bradley has earned his reputation, but you should treat each situation as its own. We've seen some blowups from Zambrano and other players. Part of it was because that's how their manager was, his personality.

So it is the fault of Jim Tracy (Dodgers), Ron Washington (Rangers), Lou Piniella (Cubs), Eric Wedge (Indians), and Bud Black (Padres) that Bradley has had some blowups? I see. They all had the personality that caused Bradley to blowup on them. I realize Piniella is a fiery guy but you can't blame Bradley's behavior on Piniella. His past of being a fiery manager has not caused Bradley to have more blowups because Bradley has had those everywhere he has gone. I also am not sure how Piniella's personality has affected Zambrano but I don't think it has made more volatile overall.

There are sportswriters who actually want Piniella to be more emotional. I wonder if Joe thinks this would have an adverse effect on Milton Bradley and he would go on a 5 state killing spree if Piniella pumped up his intensity?

JM: I'm looking forward to this year's home run derby because we have more bona fide sluggers than last year. Josh Hamilton saved the event last year, because of his great round, but Justin Morneau won it.

Thanks for the instant recap Joe.


Thanks for chatting Joe!

Thanks! We learned nothing. Seriously, how can you think that a pitcher who loses 1-0 is not a good pitcher because he was outpitched by the other pitcher? How is that not completely the fault of the offense on the losing pitcher's team? As a fan of a team who has a pitching staff that has been plagued by this problem of no offense I know this well, and so should you Joe because you are supposed to be a baseball expert. How do you still have a job? I am vexed. Joe has accurastataphobia.