Joe Morgan: Consistent Kinesiology Professor Extraordinaire

Joe Morgan has changed his chat time again this week. He is trying to fool me, I know it. Two weeks ago he chatted on Tuesday (like he normally does), last week he chatted on Wednesday and this week he chatted on Tuesday again. Joe chances the rhythm by being so inconsistent with his chats. Personally I believe he is just rebelling against his childhood and the terrifying memory of the Inconsistency Monster grabbing his ankles as he entered his bed past his well-laid out, consistent bed time. You may think he is a little old to be rebelling against his childhood, but Joe make fool of people all time in chats of Joe Morgan, so he do it to you too!

This week Joe writes paragraphs upon paragraphs in response to the questions he asked. I think he feels like if he writes more it kills time and no one will ask him about the 23 MLB teams he hasn't seen play yet this year.

Buzzmaster (11:01 am)

We've got Joe!

I see we don't get the Joe Morgan from last week who was on "uppers" and ready to chat. This week the buzzmaster has been forced to corral Joe and force him to chat with the public yet again.

Joe Morgan (11:03 am)

I was a part of an interesting game on Sunday, where both pitchers had a chance to pitch a no-hitter.

This was the first sentence of the chat. Apparently it took him two minutes to type these four sentences at the beginning of the chat. He wrote this at 11:03 am and the Buzzmaster corralled him at 11:03 am. There is a 90% chance Joe pecks at the keys on the keyboard with one finger or he ran out of the room trying to avoid chatting after the Buzzmaster "had" him and that's why it took two minutes for these four sentences to be typed.

It was a special event. Both pitchers were pretty special in that they weren't striking out a lot of hitters, but they were dominating each lineup. It was an excellent game. Fortunately or unfortunately, neither was able to pitch a nine-inning no-hitter, but it was fun to watch.

Fortunately or unfortunately? Why would it be fortunate that no pitcher was able to throw a no-hitter? Does Joe have money on the game or something? It is not like cheering for one of the pitchers to throw a no-hitter when they are both pitching a no-hitter goes against the neutrality of an analyst or anything.

jake (illinois)

how u doin joe and todays my birthday and first lilly and floyd what a pithin machup sunday can u tell me going into the 7 inning whod u think would give the first hit thank u

Jake, hope u doin fin and happy birthday 2 u and i dont now whod give up 1st hit but plez learn to writ english thank u

Naturally because Jake was talking to Joe in his own Internet language of misspelled words and terrible grammar, Joe had to answer this question.

JM: I actually thought that Floyd would give up the first hit. They had some good swings on him. They weren't getting good swings on Lilly.

So you were cheering for Ted Lilly to pitch a no-hitter then? Was it fortunate or unfortunate he didn't get the no-hitter? I wonder if Ted Lilly is one of the personnel moves the Cubs have made over the past three years that Joe hasn't liked?

Bill (KC)

Love ya Joe - prediction for the LA-Bos game and series?

(Joe's brain freaks out) "Crap, where the hell is LA-Bos at? I don't know soccer scores. It's just a bunch of pussy little freaks running around kicking a ball to me and there is no consistency. This chat is about baseball, not soccer. Bill from Kentucky needs to know this and not ask me questions like this."

(Joe sits there staring at the screen looking comatose)

(Buzzmaster) "Joe are you okay? You have to answer the question. You are just staring into space. You don't get your Tony Perez bobblehead doll if you don't answer the questions in the chat. Just say who you think will win, the Dodgers or the Red Sox...or say if you think the Celtics or Lakers will win. Just say something."

(Joe's brain panics) "Just say something generic and this too shall pass Joe. The Tony Perez bobblehead will be yours."

I'm looking forward to doing it, because I think the Dodgers are one of the great franchises in the National League and Boston is one of the great AL franchises. Those are the matchups fans want to see.

The definition of prediction: "a statement about the way things will happen in the future, often but not always based on experience or knowledge."

Stating that the Dodgers and the Red Sox are great franchises in the National League and the American League respectively isn't a prediction. Why is Joe so afraid to make a prediction or say anything of substance?

conshymatt (philly, pa)

Chase Utley is hitting just .256 for the year? Are you hearing that he's injured, or just having a hard time finding a consistent swing?

This is BotB reader Matt who posed a question to Joe this week and got it answered. I like the way he used the word "consistent" in the question. That's always a good way to get on Joe's good side and have him ramble for a while.

JM: That's an excellent question.

Congratulations Matt, you have won a Joe Morgan Medal of Honor for asking him a question that has good spelling, grammar and uses the word consistent (pins the medal on Matt). You have much favor with Joe...except for the whole good grammar and spelling part, Joe probably thinks you should have typed the following:

"Chase Utleys is consistent swing not working for him this year. Do think injureds play a part in this and is why he is hitting .256?"

Jon Miller and I were talking about this before the game on Sunday in Chicago. It's surprising to me because he got off to a great start.

Let me catch up. Did Jon Miller or Chase Utley get off to a great start? I'm pretty sure we are talking about Chase Utley, not Jon Miller, but with Joe Morgan, I never know.

It's surprising to me because he got off to a great start. He seems to get off to a great start every year, but then cools off and bounces back.

Utley's career lines for each month:

April- .306/.398/.598
May- .290.379/.518
June- .291/.377/.510
July- .341/.407/.581
August- .270/.366/.450
Sept/Oct- .267/.356/.469

Utley does get off to a great start every year, but when he cools down, it doesn't look like he bounces back to me. Obviously he is still a great second baseman at his lowest numbers. Utley's tOPS+ also dives in the second half of seasons:

April- 120
May- 100
June- 98
July- 120
August- 83
Sept/Oct- 84

So...............Joe is wrong when he says Utley bounces back, because he seems to go back down...at least for him. Utley is still better than nearly all other second basemen in the National League, even when he is struggling, so it is all relative.

I am definitely surprised, because I felt that he's the most consistent run producers as a second baseman.

Joe "felt" that Chase Utley was one of the most consistent run producers as a second baseman? Does he no longer feel this way or is he fucking with the English language like he did a few weeks ago and using the past tense in the present tense? Joe Morgan make die of you English language!

Matthew (Columbia, NJ)

Do you expect a good series between the Phillies and Yankees?

JM: The Phillies are not the Phillies they were in the World Series last year from an offensive standpoint and the Yankees shut them down in the World Series.

So Joe did not expect a good series?

The Phillies are going to have some excellent pitched ballgames to win.

Is this as opposed to win the Phillies didn't need excellent pitching to beat the Yankees? I'm not sure if I am aware of the time when any team didn't need excellent pitching to beat the Yankees.

But there's nothing like a good series to get the Phillies playing well.

So Joe expects a good series!

(Joe's brain) "Good job, that was an excellent evasive answer. Another win for Joe Morgan. Let's go to the n--" (Joe's fingers start typing rapidly and hit the enter button)

Playing on a big stage in New York could get them going.

(Joe's brain quits and goes to play in traffic without a helmet on)

Does Joe think that Philadelphia is a small city or something? Granted, New York is bigger than Philadelphia, but it is not like the Phillies play in a small town or anything. The Phillies had just got done playing in Boston and have already played the Mets in New York. Those are games on a big stage as well. I don't think playing in Yankee Stadium, which contrary to what Joe may believe is in the same large market the Mets play in, is what got the Phillies playing well.

Drew (Poughkeepsie, NY)

With all of the Strasburg-debut hoopla from last week, we never learned your thoughts on the Jim Joyce / Armando Galarraga failed perfecto... Should Selig, league have reversed the call?

JM: I watched the ESPN Wednesday night game that week and they cut into the broadcast.

I like how Joe says he watched the Wednesday night game "that week" like this is abnormal for him...which it probably is.

I was pulling for him, even though I'm a hitter.

You are not a hitter, you are a baseball analyst. I think we may have gotten to the core of the problem with Joe Morgan, he doesn't understand he broadcasts games now for ESPN and isn't an active player.

It may have looked like a close play, but I've seen thousands of plays and it was clear to me that he was out.

Joe has seen thousands of plays and it was clear to him Jason Donald was out. I like how Joe thinks because he has seen thousands of plays, he is more qualified to make a decision on whether Donald was safe or not.

Anyone with a working pair of eyes and the understanding the pitcher needs to put his foot on the bag before the runner for the runner to be out could come to the same conclusion Joe did.

Bob (Chicago)

I think Sunday night's game was more about two lousy offenses than two great pitching performances. Is that your take too?

JM: there's no doubt that both teams were struggling offensively. But I choose to give the pitchers credit, because no matter how bad an offense is going, if you throw a lot of fastballs down the middle, they will get hits.

The White Sox and the Cubs are currently in 21st and 23rd in the majors in runs, 24th and 19th in OBP, and 26th and 14th in batting average. Gavin Floyd has a 5.20 ERA on the year and Ted Lilly has a 2.90 ERA. I would say the game was a perfect mixture of two teams that couldn't hit very well and two pitchers that were pitching well. Floyd has been very bad this year, though I am not sure the Cubs could have hit him well if he were pitching the ball down the middle that night.

So Joe is saying, sure the offenses stunk, but the pitching was good...but it was much better pitching than bad hitting that caused the game to go like it did.

But you're 100% accurate that both offenses were struggling and have been all year long.

So I am sure it was all pitching since the offenses have struggled all year. There's no way two struggling offenses had anything to do with the lack of hitting in this game.

Dan (New York)

Joe, remember all the hype about Mark Pryor and his "perfect, injury avoiding delivery"? Is there such a thing as perfect mechanics in hitting or pitching that can help players avoid injury and do you see that in Strasburg?

There's absolutely Joe Morgan, who appears to have no long-term or short-term memory can remember this about Mark Prior. He probably can't even remember who the hell "Mark Prior" is.

JM: You'd have to go to a kinesiology professor to look at the strain that goes on each muscle and joint when Strasburg throws.

Joe just refuses to give his opinion on anything doesn't he? He must be frustrating to have as a father when his children were young...

(Joe's daughter as a 6 year old) "Dad, why is the sky blue?"

(Joe Morgan) "I don't know honey, you would have to ask an astronomer something like that."

(Joe's daughter) "Do you and mommy love each other?"

(Joe Morgan) "You would have to ask a psychologist that."

(Joe's daughter) "Why do carrots taste so bad if they are so good for you?"

(Joe's wife) "They just do, pleas---"

(Joe Morgan) "Actually, sweetheart we don't know if carrots are good for you or not, you would have to ask a nutritionist that question. We can't say for sure."

(Joe's daughter as a 29 year old) "Dad, I am getting married next year. Will you walk me down the aisle?"

(Joe Morgan) "I can't say for sure if I will or not, you will have to talk to my doctor to see if I will be able to do that in a year or not."

There has to be some strain some place. Throwing the baseball is an unnatural movement.

But how do you know this Joe?

I say that because I did take a class in kinesiology in college.

Mr. Big Shot here took a kinesiology class in college so he feels like he can comment on how throwing a baseball is an unnatural movement, which it obviously is.

Just compare Joe's eagerness to chime in on a discussion about throwing a baseball and how he perceives himself as "in the know" about this issue because he took one class in kinesiology in college, with the fact he played MLB for years and is a Hall of Fame player, yet seems reluctant to give his concrete opinion on nearly any baseball-related question asked of him. How can this happen? Joe Morgan is one of the greatest baseball players of all-time and he covers baseball for a living, yet he seems reluctant to say why the Cubs are struggling to hit because he isn't in the clubhouse and he won't say what he thinks is wrong with a hitter when he is struggling at the plate, but he throws out facts about kinesiology because he took a class in college on this subject. This man is maddening.

Dan (New York)

Joe, from a former players and fan perspective do you get more enjoyment seeing a young team like the Rays who have built themselves from internally or a team of veterans (some perhaps bought) like the Yankees win?

Here's a great example. Joe is not being asked WHICH IS BETTER, but he is asked WHICH ONE HE PREFERS. This is not a loaded question and is a matter of opinion. Needless to say (spoiler alert) we don't get an opinion.

(Joe's brain makes a cameo) "Red alert, we have a direct question being posed to us that would cause an opinion to be given. Deflect the opinion and divert all power to not giving an answer."

From a fans perspective, I like to see a good team, an exciting team, young guys grow into roles of stars and play well.

Oh, so a young team. This is actually the one I prefer as well. I think everyone prefers this because it feels more "pure" for some reason.

But I also like to see a dominant team. When a team becomes a team that everyone looks at, a team that everybody wants to beat or emulate, I like that as well.

And here we go. Not only does not answer the question posed, he misunderstands the question. Dan from New York was not asking if Joe likes young teams or dominant teams, he was asking if Joe likes young teams who have been brought up together or a team that has a bunch of free agents on the same team. A dominant team can also be a team that grew up together and stayed together, as well as a team that signs a lot of expensive free agents, so Joe's answer can pertain to both types of teams.

Everyone in the AL starts the season saying they need to beat the Yankees to get to the World Series and I like that. But I also like a team like the Rays that people say can be dangerous. It just depends.

Depends on what? It depends on which you would prefer? THAT'S THE QUESTION YOU WERE ASKED, WHICH ONE YOU PREFER! This isn't a question of whether you want pizza or burritos more overall for dinner, where it depends on your certain mood. Which way of building a team does Joe Morgan get more enjoyment out of seeing? Simple question, that needs a simple answer. Joe answers with "it just depends," but doesn't say what it depends on or how "it just depends" actually refers to "it depends on my personal opinion of which one I prefer."

Dedric Flowers (memphis TN)

do you think the redsox will make a run for the world series?

JM: Pedroia is a good player, but he's not like Ortiz in the big moments. That's the problem. At one time they had Manny and Papi. But, that said, there are not that many great teams in the league anyway. All teams have weaknesses now.

I would love to know when the time was that no teams had weaknesses. Was it before expansion? Was it when there were fewer teams? Was it when Joe Morgan played? All teams had weaknesses throughout the history of baseball.

Guess what? The 1976 Reds only had average pitching. They were league average in about every category. I don't know if that is considered a weakness or not, but there is some evidence the 1976 Reds wouldn't have been considered a "complete team" in Joe Morgan's eyes if they played today and he were an analyst that covered their games.

I wonder if Joe remembers the inconsistency the 1976 Reds showed? Joe bashes some teams for not being complete because they win some games in a row and then a lose few. Here's some data for the 1976 Reds.

-They started the year off winning four games, losing two games, winning one game, losing two games, winning one, and then losing one.

-From May 16-May 26 they lost a game, won two games, lost a game, won a game, lost a game, won three in a row, and then lost a game.

-From July 3-July 9 they did not lose a game. Then they lost three games in a row and won four games in a row.

-From August 14-17 the Reds lost four games sandwiched between 2 three-game winning streaks.

The 1976 Reds were a great team, but they were inconsistent like every MLB team is. It's normal to have winning and losing streaks. Joe needs to quit harping on teams losing a couple in a row and then calling that team "not complete." His Reds teams weren't immune to being streaky at all.

When Boston's not in Boston, their offense is challenged.

The Red Sox on the road are 7th in MLB in runs scored, 3rd in home runs, 4th in batting average, 2nd in OBP, and 1st in SLG%. They are in no way offensively challenged away from Fenway Park.

Dan (New York)

Joe, given the missed call in the no hitter, I was very surprised to see that something like 75% of current players dont want any instant replay in baseball. Whats your take?

JM: First of all, it wasn't a scientific survey. It was just 50 guys taken from each league. There are 750 players. I think it was something like 13% of the players were polled. There wasn't big enough sampling.

Here goes Joe giving an opinion what constitutes a scientific survey. Not only did he take a kinesiology class, but he must have taken a statistics course in college as well.

I know a fair amount about statistics and sampling. 13% of a sample of 750 players seems to be quite a sufficient sample size to derive some sort of information from. The reason they call it a "sample" is because it is a small part of the entire population. 13% of the population is a good enough sample size to believe the information collected. So, possibly Joe should stick to not giving his opinion when it doesn't involve baseball...even though he won't give his opinion on baseball anyway.

Maybe Joe doesn't understand statistics at all and that is why he hates them so much.

I can live with them just doing the home runs. The games will be too long. While you're reviewing the plays, the pitcher is just standing on the mound. It's not an ideal situation.

Would Joe say it "chances the rhythm" of the game? As pointed out in the comments last week, baseball games have their rhythm destroyed by constant pitching changes late in the game anyway, so instant replay really wouldn't screw anything up more than 3 pitching changes in an inning does.

I thought the commissioner could have overturned the play because it was the last play of the game. If it were the 23rd or 24th out, they couldn't have done that, but it was the last play so he could have overturned it...But we change calls all the time on home runs. We changed the call on George Brett.

If Joe is referring to the Pine Tar Incident, then the home run call was not changed on George Brett due to instant replay, but because of a rules violation relating to how much pine tar can be used on a bat. These are two completely separate things. To say because George Brett had his home run taken away because of a rules violation and this is why instant replay should be used in the Armando Galarraga non-perfect game situation is misunderstanding the difference in each situation completely.

Great questions. It was interesting to see Strasburg look more like a rookie phenom than a rookie superstar.

It was interesting to merely use a different type of wording to describe Strasburg. This is gibberish.

J.R. Richards struck out 15 in his debut,

J.R. RICHARD! RICHARD! Joe played with J.R. Richard, how does he constantly mess this up?

but I'm sure he walked some hitters. But he was great in his first start and was very good on Sunday.

Richard struck out 15 in his debut and Joe is sure he walked a couple of hitters. "He" was great in his first start and good on Sunday. Joe doesn't think J.R. Richard pitched on Sunday does he? I think someone at ESPN needs to talk to Joe about how he uses "he" and "she." Joe as a police officer:

(Joe Morgan talking to his partner on a stakeout in a dangerous neighborhood) "My uncle loves to go hunting. He wants to go sometime this week with me, but I wasn't sure if I had a weapon to go with him. We talked about it and I think if he lent me a weapon I would go with him. I think he has enough weapons for the both of us. (looks out the window and sees a gun approaching the car with a gun) He has a gun."

(his partner gets shot and killed by the man outside the car with a gun and the gunman misses Joe with a few shots...Joe Morgan just drives away and yells at the gunman out the window for not being consistent enough in his shooting habits as the gunman flees the scene)