This week's chat contains many more contradictions from things he said last week, the week before, and in some cases contradictions from the sentence he had just written. It got me thinking, rather than having multiple personalities, perhaps Joe Morgan has passed away. Did Joe Morgan pass away in 2002 and ESPN was too lazy to hire a new Sunday analyst so they kidnapped a person who looks just like Joe and have forced him to live out his life as Joe Morgan? This would explain why Joe can't answer a question about baseball, doesn't know the names of his teammates and why he doesn't like the book "Moneyball."
The Imposter Joe had learned everything he could about baseball and then this smart-ass Michael Lewis comes out with a book that makes everything Imposter Joe learn to be wrong. If you had just crammed all of the information about a sport into your head to live out a forced fake life as an ex-baseball player, would you want to learn new information? Me neither. This guy just wants to make it through the day without revealing himself to be an imposter, so he tries to push away as many questions as possible and never says anything of substance in order to just get through each baseball telecast and each chat.
Either that or Joe just sucks as a baseball analyst. I think that may be more likely. Tighten your seatbelts for a bumpy ride, Joe is on fire this week.
Buzzmaster: We've got Joe!
Joe Morgan gets paid to analyze baseball games one day a week and does a 30 minute chat where the reader actually manages to leave the chat with less information about baseball than he went into the chat having. Suffice to say, we don't have Joe, he has us.
Now that the Buzzmaster has pulled Joe away from watching "The Price Is Right" (you know Joe watches it everyday and misses Bob Barker, who was a much more consistent host than Drew Carey), let's see what contradictions Joe has to throw at us as he avoids trying to give an answer to the questions posed.
JM: What a great comeback by the Yankees in the ninth inning on Sunday. To be four down in the ninth and to tie the game without the benefit of the home run was very impressive.
It's interesting Joe Morgan hates it when teams sit around and wait for someone to hit a three run home run and prefers speed and "playing baseball the right way," yet he freely admits here it is easier to score more runs in an inning by hitting a home run. A lesser analyst wouldn't be able to justify these two opinions together, but Joe is just rubbing his ignorance in our face now.
KC (Atlanta)
Joe, do the Braves have enough offense to stay ahead of the Mets and Phillies? If not what are there options to improve?
JM: The only team of the three that has a proven offense is the Phillies. Their offense has been suspect lately.
Joe has traditionally struggled with time. Short-term time and long-term time and how to compare a team over the long-term and the short-term. All he knows is that today's MLB teams aren't as good as MLB teams used to be. The Phillies have had a proven offense over the last three or four seasons, this is true. But past results don't predict the future results for the Phillies. Simply because the Phillies have had a great offense in the past couple of years doesn't mean the Braves or Mets don't have enough offense to stay ahead of the Phillies. Each year is different and because the Phillies are proven in the past doesn't mean anything in the realm of this year if the offense is struggling (which is struggling relative to the Phillies offense in the past)...until the Phillies start hitting well.
Short-term, the Mets and Braves may have enough offense because the only year that counts, 2010, the Phillies haven't hit well. Now I am confusing myself. Let's move on...
The answer is yes that I think the Braves have enough because of their pitching.
This is a perfect Joe Morgan chat answer. The Braves have enough offense because of their pitching. Because the Braves have good pitching they have enough offense. In Joe's screwed up mind, this makes sense and this the very reason he stinks at analyzing regarding baseball.
Let's say the Braves don't have good enough pitching, then they won't have enough offense to keep up with the Mets and Phillies. The idea the Braves have enough offense, based on how good their pitching has been is pure lunacy. KC isn't asking if the Braves pitching can carry them past the Mets or Phillies, he wants to know if they have enough offense to keep up with the Mets and Phillies, regardless of the pitching. Most teams that have great pitching will win games, but the question was about the offense solely and didn't relate to the pitching.
If they pitch up to their potential and Jurgens and Hanson get back on track, I think they can hold on.
I take it from the fact he hasn't talked about a single Braves hitter as a "no" the Braves don't have enough offense in Joe's opinion.
A lot will depend on what the Mets will be able to do offensively and if they get Beltran back.
And now the Braves chances of winning the division don't rely a lot on the Braves pitching, but rely on how good the Mets are offensively.
So in conclusion, the Phillies have a proven offense but not a good offense this year, the Braves have enough offense if their pitching is good, for the pitching to be good Tommy Hanson and Jair Jurrjens need to pitch to their potential (WHAT THE HELL DOES JOE MEAN BY POTENTIAL?????) but if the Mets are good offensively and Carlos Beltran comes back, the Braves won't have enough offense. So the Braves offense being enough to win the division depends on whether Carlos Beltran comes back or not. This makes very little sense.
Nick (NJ)
How Special do you think Stephen Strausberg is
JM: I think he has unlimited potential, kind of like I said about J.R. Richards on Sunday.
RICHARD! It is J.R. Richard not J.R. Richard(s). I tried to ignore it when Joe butchered Jair Jurrjens name in the previous question and spelled it "Jurgens," but I can't ignore how he can't spell his own ex-teammate's name correct for the 3rd straight week. Somehow Joe actually has less knowledge about baseball than the average fan. This isn't a spelling contest, but shouldn't Joe at least spell the player's names correctly since he is presumably an "expert" on baseball?
Mike W (Chiacgo)
Where is the love for Joey Votto? Everyone talks about Pujols and not Joey but really compare their numbers: Votto: .312/.415/.559 16 HR, 51 RBIs, 48 Runs, 7 SBs, and only 2 errorsPujols: .305/.420/.542 16 HR, 52 RBIs, 41 Runs, 7 SBs and 3 errors
JM: Obviously, I think Joey Votto is a very good player, but I don't know how anyone can compare him to Pujols.
Again, Joe struggles with the issue of time. Mike is not saying that because Votto is playing well this year he is just as good of a player as Albert Pujols overall. He is saying Votto is having an impressive year because it is close to/better than Pujols' year and he should get some recognition for this. Long-term he isn't saying Votto is better, but instead is saying Votto deserves recognition for playing well this year. Joe mentally can't comprehend this. I wonder if this happens in other parts of Joe's life...
-(Joe's wife) "Joe, did you mow the grass? It doesn't look like you did."
(Joe Morgan) "I mowed the grass last week, so yes I did mow the grass."
-(Joe looking into buying a new car and talking to a salesman) "Is this 2010 Toyota Camry as good as the 1999 Toyota Camry. I am looking at buying one of those two."
(Salesperson) "I would definitely buy the new Camry, it has a lot less miles and is therefore a better car."
(Joe Morgan) "I don't think you can say the 2010 Camry is a better car. This Camry had 150,000 miles on it and is still running very well. This 2010 Camry only has 3,267 miles on it, so we don't know if it is a better car or not."
(Salesperson) "The 2010 Camry has less miles on it, so I think it is a better car potentially for you to purchase and keep for ten more years."
(Joe Morgan) "What the hell do you mean by potential (punches the salesperson in the solarplex)? That doesn't make sense. The 1999 Camry has a lot of miles which means it is a proven car, so it is better than the 2010 Camry which doesn't have as many miles. You can't even compare the two."
(Salesperson) "I am not saying the 1999 Camry isn't a better car than the 2010 Camry, I am just saying if you are buying a car now, I would go with the one that has less miles on it because it will be a better car in the future...potentially (waits to get punched in the solarplex again)."
(Joe Morgan) "I don't care what you say. The 1999 Camry has been a better car over the last 5 years and you can't compare them. I will pay you $21,500 for the 1999 Camry (smiles knowing he got himself a great deal). Put me on the books for it."
Pujols has won three MVPs, batting championship. You can't just compare someone to a great player because he's having a great year.
YOU CAN COMPARE THEM AGAINST EACH OTHER FOR THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR!
That's part of my issue with Strasburg. Just because he's had some success in a short period of time, you can't compare him to Lincecum and those guys.
Oh sure, NOW Joe Morgan is all about Tim Lincecum being a great pitcher. Here is Joe from a chat in late April:
Ray A. (San Francisco, CA)
Mr. Morgan, what do you think of the Giants Tim Lincecum? If you could compare him to one pitcher, who would it be?
JM: Obviously, he has proven to me that he is going to, he's not yet there, a great pitcher.
Being blunt with you, I didn't think he should have won the Cy Young last year. Wainwright, to me, had the best season of a pitcher last year.
Lincecum went 2-3 down the stretch.
So Lincecum is not yet a great pitcher, but compared to Strasburg, Joe Morgan thinks Tim Lincecum is like Juan Marichal...except Joe wouldn't compare Lincecum to Marichal quite yet.
I just think you have to wait a little bit before comparing him to a Juan Marichal.
Possibly because Lincecum hasn't beaten a catcher over the head with a baseball bat yet. Once Lincecum does that to Chris Snyder, like Marichal did to Johnny Roseboro, then Joe Morgan will consider Lincecum to be just like Juan Marichal.
But Votto is having a great impact on the Reds and he's one of the main reasons they're in first.
But there is no way we can compare Votto's year in 2010 to Pujols' year in 2010 because Pujols had better numbers the seven years prior to that? I would give a $100 to live in Joe Morgan's mind for ten minutes.
Cooler (Dayton, Ohio)
Do you think the Reds need to go out and get help this year to hold off the Cards?
JM: The first thing they need is one or two pitchers in the bullpen late.
Otherwise known to the layperson as "relief pitchers."
You can always use a veteran left handed hitter coming off the bench. You can say that about a lot of teams.
So the one thing the Reds need to hold off the Cards is the same thing a lot of teams need?
Their starters will be good by the time the season is over.
Joe ends the question with this. I like how he tends to finish answering a question with a statement that needs some clarification, but we never get that clarification.
"The Reds need another bat in the lineup and they are great fielders. I like their chances to win the NL Central. It appears they are all going to die from the H1N1 virus going around the locker room, so they probably won't be alive to finish the season. Next question please."
Michael (Minneapolis)
The Twins made a great decision years ago by sticking with Terry Ryan through tough times in the 90's. He ended up building a perennial contender before handing things over to Bill Smith. Do too many teams give up on GMs too early? Should teams be more appreciative of the fact there might be growing pains?
JM: Personally, I don't think they give up on GMs too early. I think GMs have not been held accountable for a lot of the bad trades they've made.
Obviously terrible GMs should be fired, but every GM makes a bad trade or two, there is really no way around it. Certain GMs make more bad trades than others, but you also don't know if they made that trade at the insistence of the owner. So it would be hard to fire a guy when you as the owner told that guy what trades to make. I don't know how much this goes on, but wanted to throw it out there to at least think about.
I don't think the GMs have been held accountable enough. In the past, it was always fire the manager and not hold the GM accountable for not giving the manager good talent. But now, everyone's held accountable and that's the way it should be.
Joe thinks GMs haven't been held accountable enough, but now every GM is held accountable? What about Jim Hendry? That's Joe's favorite whipping boy, is he held accountable now? I just hate blanket statements like this. EVERYONE is not held accountable now, that's impossible.
Duncan (Foster, NY)
Hi Joe, who do you think will win the AL West, the Rangers or the Angels?
JM: That's a very, very difficult question.
No, it's not. Joe needs to go purchase a hat, write down "Rangers" and "Angels" on two separate pieces of paper, put those papers in the hat, draw a name out of the hat and say THAT'S the team that will win the AL West. This method will be better than what Joe is getting ready to put us through.
The Angels, right now, are a very good team, but you just can't tell which direction they'll go in down the road.
Joe's not a psychic, asshole! How could he use what knowledge about baseball he has to analyze and predict what could happen? Can anyone do this? It's very, very hard to do this because you have to think and then explain in written form while also typing what you are thinking.
They've had injuries, but all teams have injuries over the course of the season.
So this sentence is filler and isn't a reason the Angels can or can't win the division? I'm glad we added this statement to the discussion then.
I just don't see the Angels being as good as they were last year.
Ah yes another team, much like the Yankees last week, that isn't a good team because they don't meet Joe's personal expectations for them.
Joe just said right now, the Angels are a very good team. Is Texas, right now, a very good team too Joe? Compare in your head and then discuss in the answer to this question.
It's just hard to predict which team will win.
I can actually feel Joe sweating right now.
If you force me to answer, I will go with Texas.
What if I don't force you to answer, but ask your opinion?
A lot of good things are happening there.
The weather is beautiful in Texas, the flowers seem to be blooming faster than usual, the people are just down-home nice to everyone, and Applebee's just opened up a new restaurant in downtown Amarillo that has great local sports memorabilia lining the walls. THINGS ARE ON THE UPSWING IN TEXAS!
Geoff (Philadelphia)
Joe - an honor to chat with you! As a life-long NYY fan, I hear the payroll topic come up frequently. What's your opinion on how baseball should address the economic structure to keep a highly competitive environment AND satisfy the needs of the MLBPA?
(the sound of this question zooming over Joe's head)
JM: I don't think you can just point to the money factor. In most cases, the Yankees have spent their money wise.
Joe needs to learn to read the question he is asked. This guy isn't asking about the Yankees, he just said he was a Yankees fan. I think Joe just scans the question and looks for words he understands, latches on to those words, and then answers the question using only those words he likes.
Ben (Greensboro, NC)
"Hey Joe, Philadelphia and New York Yankees are having some offensive problems this year. Do you think they should make a move to get a batter like B.J. Upton or do you think they should stick with what they have? It doesn't look like either team will make the playoffs, much less the World Series at this point!"
Joe Morgan: I didn't really find B.J. Upton to be offensive. He should have run after the ball a little bit faster. I think you are wrong though, Philadelphia and the Yankees won't meet in the World Series this year. It's too early to tell what the Yankees and Phillies will look to improve in the offseason.
I can completely see Joe answering my hypothetical question in this way.
kramer (ny)
Thoughts on Upton-Longoria situation?
JM: I don't know exactly what happened.
Thanks for chatting with us Joe. Glad you are here to answer these questions so well.
conshymatt (philly)
Who is the best defensive player in baseball?
This is BotB reader Matt, not Joebaiting, but asking an actual question...that won't get an answer.
JM: That's a tough question. I think there are a lot of good defensive players.
(Joe's brain) "Just kill time and hope the computer crashes. Maybe the world will end now. (waits for five seconds and the world doesn't end) Shit, now I have to answer this question."
You have to rate them by position.
You mean like how the Gold Gloves are awarded at each position? You could also just name a player, any player, that you consider to be the best defensive player in baseball.
I think they've done a good job the last few years, if you look at the gold glove winners.
NO ONE IS ASKING ABOUT HOW WELL THE COACHES AND MANAGERS HAVE DONE IN VOTING FOR GOLD GLOVE WINNERS! WHY DO YOU EXIST?
There might be one or two exceptions, but I think they've done a good job.
Matt asked who the best defensive player in the majors currently is and Joe Morgan answered that he thinks the Gold Glove winners have been well-selected over the last few years. This is why I think Joe died several years ago and has been replaced by an imposter. There's no way a person who takes 1% pride in his ability to understand baseball could answer this question so terribly.
Matt: Who is the best defensive player in baseball?
Imposter Joe Morgan: I don't fucking know who the hell that would be, but I know the Gold Glove winners seem like good defenders. Man, those coaches and managers seem to do a good job with that voting!
Scott (South Dakota)
Joe - any chance the Giants make some moves at the deadline to improve their playoff chances this year?
JM: The Giants are like all of the teams, they have weaknesses. Their offense is still suspect. You can't expect Lincecum and Cain, Sanchez, Zito and all the pitcher to hold the opposition to 2 or less runs every day.
We have covered that the Giants probably should make a move, but does Joe Morgan think the Giants will make a move?
(spoiler alert) We don't get an answer to this question.
They still need some consistent offense. But with that said, if you look around the NL West, all of the teams are suspect.
So the Giants don't need to make a move because every team in the division isn't a perfect team? So the Giants have the same problem as all the other teams in the NL West. Does this even mean anything? Why can't Joe just answer the question?
Has anyone at ESPN ever tried to talk to Joe about answering the question posed?
(ESPN executive) "Joe, we need you to read the question and then answer the question asked. Our commenters are getting upset at you."
(Joe Morgan) "I am not upset with anyone. I enjoy working here at ESPN."
(ESPN executive getting a headache) "When a question is asked, try your best to answer the question that is being asked. Just do it for 30 minutes and we will buy you an ice cream cone. Deal?"
(Joe Morgan) "I will answer the question posed to me. I would love to have some ice cream, let's go!"
(ESPN executive throws himself down a flight of stairs)
ross (kentucky)
Joe, Whats your thoughts on Brandon Phillips? I believe as far as OVERALL he is the best 2B in the NL. No one is close defensively, he will steal you a base was a 30/30 guy and hits for power.
JM: I think you're exactly right. He's the best overall 2B in the league at this moment. He's played much, much better the last few weeks.
Let's get this straight. Joe won't even hear of the argument that Joey Votto is playing as well as Albert Pujols this year, even though the statistics back it up, but Brandon Phillips outperforms Chase Utley for one year and now all of a sudden he is the best second baseman in the league at this moment? How the hell did this just happen? I don't care how Joe judges the best player at each position, just be consistent with it. The Inconsistency Monster is very angry with Joe right now. He's dragging his bat along the base of Joe's bedroom door in a threatening manner.
Joe refused to even think about the idea Votto may be having as good of a year as Pujols, though it was shown in the statistics included with the question that this was true. Based on the fact Chase Utley is having a sub-par year Joe thinks Brandon Phillips is the best second baseman in the NL.
Utley this year: .277/.383/.466, 11 HR, 37 RBIs, 126 OPS+
Phillips this year: .313/.371/.481, 9 HR, 25 RBIs, 127 OPS+
Phillips is playing slightly better than Utley, but it is very, very close. I can't believe Joe is jumping on the Brandon Phillips bandwagon while he sticks with Pujols to the very bitter end. Plus, Chase Utley is injured right now, so I am sure that had to contribute in some way to his sub-par year.
He has shown that he has great ability.
So has Chase Utley. He has shown he is a better second baseman than Brandon Phillips over the long-term. So based on Joe's previous indignant answer that Votto is not as good as Pujols or shouldn't get the respect Pujols gets, Joe should still consider Utley better than Phillips.
I'm not saying this is a correct point of view, but is how Joe's brain should work.
Derek (Plymouth)
How do the red sox stay in contention with so many players out due to injury?
JM: You have to look at them staying in contention with New York.
Sorry Tampa Bay. You may be a few games back for the division lead, but Joe Morgan doesn't think you stand a chance to win the division. He really has no reason to think this, other than there is a 95% chance he hasn't seen the Rays play this year.
JM: I think after the all-star break, we will have a better feel for the teams that could win their division.
Joe thinks as the season comes closer to ending it will be easier to tell which teams could win their division. This statement is pretty much the definition of an obvious statement. Joe already has a feel if Tampa can win the AL East and the answer is they can not.
Some teams will go to the front of the class. We'll see if I'm correct, but I do think there will be some separation.
We will see if Joe is right or not that there will be some separation. Joe will be correct and some teams will win their division, either that, or all of the divisions will end up tied at the end of the year, leading to six one-game playoffs to determine which teams are in the playoffs.
This is classic Joe Morgan. He is telling us if the divisions don't all end up tied, some teams will end up with better records than other teams.
Joe Morgan gets paid to analyze baseball games one day a week and does a 30 minute chat where the reader actually manages to leave the chat with less information about baseball than he went into the chat having. Suffice to say, we don't have Joe, he has us.
Now that the Buzzmaster has pulled Joe away from watching "The Price Is Right" (you know Joe watches it everyday and misses Bob Barker, who was a much more consistent host than Drew Carey), let's see what contradictions Joe has to throw at us as he avoids trying to give an answer to the questions posed.
JM: What a great comeback by the Yankees in the ninth inning on Sunday. To be four down in the ninth and to tie the game without the benefit of the home run was very impressive.
It's interesting Joe Morgan hates it when teams sit around and wait for someone to hit a three run home run and prefers speed and "playing baseball the right way," yet he freely admits here it is easier to score more runs in an inning by hitting a home run. A lesser analyst wouldn't be able to justify these two opinions together, but Joe is just rubbing his ignorance in our face now.
KC (Atlanta)
Joe, do the Braves have enough offense to stay ahead of the Mets and Phillies? If not what are there options to improve?
JM: The only team of the three that has a proven offense is the Phillies. Their offense has been suspect lately.
Joe has traditionally struggled with time. Short-term time and long-term time and how to compare a team over the long-term and the short-term. All he knows is that today's MLB teams aren't as good as MLB teams used to be. The Phillies have had a proven offense over the last three or four seasons, this is true. But past results don't predict the future results for the Phillies. Simply because the Phillies have had a great offense in the past couple of years doesn't mean the Braves or Mets don't have enough offense to stay ahead of the Phillies. Each year is different and because the Phillies are proven in the past doesn't mean anything in the realm of this year if the offense is struggling (which is struggling relative to the Phillies offense in the past)...until the Phillies start hitting well.
Short-term, the Mets and Braves may have enough offense because the only year that counts, 2010, the Phillies haven't hit well. Now I am confusing myself. Let's move on...
The answer is yes that I think the Braves have enough because of their pitching.
This is a perfect Joe Morgan chat answer. The Braves have enough offense because of their pitching. Because the Braves have good pitching they have enough offense. In Joe's screwed up mind, this makes sense and this the very reason he stinks at analyzing regarding baseball.
Let's say the Braves don't have good enough pitching, then they won't have enough offense to keep up with the Mets and Phillies. The idea the Braves have enough offense, based on how good their pitching has been is pure lunacy. KC isn't asking if the Braves pitching can carry them past the Mets or Phillies, he wants to know if they have enough offense to keep up with the Mets and Phillies, regardless of the pitching. Most teams that have great pitching will win games, but the question was about the offense solely and didn't relate to the pitching.
If they pitch up to their potential and Jurgens and Hanson get back on track, I think they can hold on.
I take it from the fact he hasn't talked about a single Braves hitter as a "no" the Braves don't have enough offense in Joe's opinion.
A lot will depend on what the Mets will be able to do offensively and if they get Beltran back.
And now the Braves chances of winning the division don't rely a lot on the Braves pitching, but rely on how good the Mets are offensively.
So in conclusion, the Phillies have a proven offense but not a good offense this year, the Braves have enough offense if their pitching is good, for the pitching to be good Tommy Hanson and Jair Jurrjens need to pitch to their potential (WHAT THE HELL DOES JOE MEAN BY POTENTIAL?????) but if the Mets are good offensively and Carlos Beltran comes back, the Braves won't have enough offense. So the Braves offense being enough to win the division depends on whether Carlos Beltran comes back or not. This makes very little sense.
Nick (NJ)
How Special do you think Stephen Strausberg is
JM: I think he has unlimited potential, kind of like I said about J.R. Richards on Sunday.
RICHARD! It is J.R. Richard not J.R. Richard(s). I tried to ignore it when Joe butchered Jair Jurrjens name in the previous question and spelled it "Jurgens," but I can't ignore how he can't spell his own ex-teammate's name correct for the 3rd straight week. Somehow Joe actually has less knowledge about baseball than the average fan. This isn't a spelling contest, but shouldn't Joe at least spell the player's names correctly since he is presumably an "expert" on baseball?
Mike W (Chiacgo)
Where is the love for Joey Votto? Everyone talks about Pujols and not Joey but really compare their numbers: Votto: .312/.415/.559 16 HR, 51 RBIs, 48 Runs, 7 SBs, and only 2 errorsPujols: .305/.420/.542 16 HR, 52 RBIs, 41 Runs, 7 SBs and 3 errors
JM: Obviously, I think Joey Votto is a very good player, but I don't know how anyone can compare him to Pujols.
Again, Joe struggles with the issue of time. Mike is not saying that because Votto is playing well this year he is just as good of a player as Albert Pujols overall. He is saying Votto is having an impressive year because it is close to/better than Pujols' year and he should get some recognition for this. Long-term he isn't saying Votto is better, but instead is saying Votto deserves recognition for playing well this year. Joe mentally can't comprehend this. I wonder if this happens in other parts of Joe's life...
-(Joe's wife) "Joe, did you mow the grass? It doesn't look like you did."
(Joe Morgan) "I mowed the grass last week, so yes I did mow the grass."
-(Joe looking into buying a new car and talking to a salesman) "Is this 2010 Toyota Camry as good as the 1999 Toyota Camry. I am looking at buying one of those two."
(Salesperson) "I would definitely buy the new Camry, it has a lot less miles and is therefore a better car."
(Joe Morgan) "I don't think you can say the 2010 Camry is a better car. This Camry had 150,000 miles on it and is still running very well. This 2010 Camry only has 3,267 miles on it, so we don't know if it is a better car or not."
(Salesperson) "The 2010 Camry has less miles on it, so I think it is a better car potentially for you to purchase and keep for ten more years."
(Joe Morgan) "What the hell do you mean by potential (punches the salesperson in the solarplex)? That doesn't make sense. The 1999 Camry has a lot of miles which means it is a proven car, so it is better than the 2010 Camry which doesn't have as many miles. You can't even compare the two."
(Salesperson) "I am not saying the 1999 Camry isn't a better car than the 2010 Camry, I am just saying if you are buying a car now, I would go with the one that has less miles on it because it will be a better car in the future...potentially (waits to get punched in the solarplex again)."
(Joe Morgan) "I don't care what you say. The 1999 Camry has been a better car over the last 5 years and you can't compare them. I will pay you $21,500 for the 1999 Camry (smiles knowing he got himself a great deal). Put me on the books for it."
Pujols has won three MVPs, batting championship. You can't just compare someone to a great player because he's having a great year.
YOU CAN COMPARE THEM AGAINST EACH OTHER FOR THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR! THIS YEAR!
That's part of my issue with Strasburg. Just because he's had some success in a short period of time, you can't compare him to Lincecum and those guys.
Oh sure, NOW Joe Morgan is all about Tim Lincecum being a great pitcher. Here is Joe from a chat in late April:
Ray A. (San Francisco, CA)
Mr. Morgan, what do you think of the Giants Tim Lincecum? If you could compare him to one pitcher, who would it be?
JM: Obviously, he has proven to me that he is going to, he's not yet there, a great pitcher.
Being blunt with you, I didn't think he should have won the Cy Young last year. Wainwright, to me, had the best season of a pitcher last year.
Lincecum went 2-3 down the stretch.
So Lincecum is not yet a great pitcher, but compared to Strasburg, Joe Morgan thinks Tim Lincecum is like Juan Marichal...except Joe wouldn't compare Lincecum to Marichal quite yet.
I just think you have to wait a little bit before comparing him to a Juan Marichal.
Possibly because Lincecum hasn't beaten a catcher over the head with a baseball bat yet. Once Lincecum does that to Chris Snyder, like Marichal did to Johnny Roseboro, then Joe Morgan will consider Lincecum to be just like Juan Marichal.
But Votto is having a great impact on the Reds and he's one of the main reasons they're in first.
But there is no way we can compare Votto's year in 2010 to Pujols' year in 2010 because Pujols had better numbers the seven years prior to that? I would give a $100 to live in Joe Morgan's mind for ten minutes.
Cooler (Dayton, Ohio)
Do you think the Reds need to go out and get help this year to hold off the Cards?
JM: The first thing they need is one or two pitchers in the bullpen late.
Otherwise known to the layperson as "relief pitchers."
You can always use a veteran left handed hitter coming off the bench. You can say that about a lot of teams.
So the one thing the Reds need to hold off the Cards is the same thing a lot of teams need?
Their starters will be good by the time the season is over.
Joe ends the question with this. I like how he tends to finish answering a question with a statement that needs some clarification, but we never get that clarification.
"The Reds need another bat in the lineup and they are great fielders. I like their chances to win the NL Central. It appears they are all going to die from the H1N1 virus going around the locker room, so they probably won't be alive to finish the season. Next question please."
Michael (Minneapolis)
The Twins made a great decision years ago by sticking with Terry Ryan through tough times in the 90's. He ended up building a perennial contender before handing things over to Bill Smith. Do too many teams give up on GMs too early? Should teams be more appreciative of the fact there might be growing pains?
JM: Personally, I don't think they give up on GMs too early. I think GMs have not been held accountable for a lot of the bad trades they've made.
Obviously terrible GMs should be fired, but every GM makes a bad trade or two, there is really no way around it. Certain GMs make more bad trades than others, but you also don't know if they made that trade at the insistence of the owner. So it would be hard to fire a guy when you as the owner told that guy what trades to make. I don't know how much this goes on, but wanted to throw it out there to at least think about.
I don't think the GMs have been held accountable enough. In the past, it was always fire the manager and not hold the GM accountable for not giving the manager good talent. But now, everyone's held accountable and that's the way it should be.
Joe thinks GMs haven't been held accountable enough, but now every GM is held accountable? What about Jim Hendry? That's Joe's favorite whipping boy, is he held accountable now? I just hate blanket statements like this. EVERYONE is not held accountable now, that's impossible.
Duncan (Foster, NY)
Hi Joe, who do you think will win the AL West, the Rangers or the Angels?
JM: That's a very, very difficult question.
No, it's not. Joe needs to go purchase a hat, write down "Rangers" and "Angels" on two separate pieces of paper, put those papers in the hat, draw a name out of the hat and say THAT'S the team that will win the AL West. This method will be better than what Joe is getting ready to put us through.
The Angels, right now, are a very good team, but you just can't tell which direction they'll go in down the road.
Joe's not a psychic, asshole! How could he use what knowledge about baseball he has to analyze and predict what could happen? Can anyone do this? It's very, very hard to do this because you have to think and then explain in written form while also typing what you are thinking.
They've had injuries, but all teams have injuries over the course of the season.
So this sentence is filler and isn't a reason the Angels can or can't win the division? I'm glad we added this statement to the discussion then.
I just don't see the Angels being as good as they were last year.
Ah yes another team, much like the Yankees last week, that isn't a good team because they don't meet Joe's personal expectations for them.
Joe just said right now, the Angels are a very good team. Is Texas, right now, a very good team too Joe? Compare in your head and then discuss in the answer to this question.
It's just hard to predict which team will win.
I can actually feel Joe sweating right now.
If you force me to answer, I will go with Texas.
What if I don't force you to answer, but ask your opinion?
A lot of good things are happening there.
The weather is beautiful in Texas, the flowers seem to be blooming faster than usual, the people are just down-home nice to everyone, and Applebee's just opened up a new restaurant in downtown Amarillo that has great local sports memorabilia lining the walls. THINGS ARE ON THE UPSWING IN TEXAS!
Geoff (Philadelphia)
Joe - an honor to chat with you! As a life-long NYY fan, I hear the payroll topic come up frequently. What's your opinion on how baseball should address the economic structure to keep a highly competitive environment AND satisfy the needs of the MLBPA?
(the sound of this question zooming over Joe's head)
JM: I don't think you can just point to the money factor. In most cases, the Yankees have spent their money wise.
Joe needs to learn to read the question he is asked. This guy isn't asking about the Yankees, he just said he was a Yankees fan. I think Joe just scans the question and looks for words he understands, latches on to those words, and then answers the question using only those words he likes.
Ben (Greensboro, NC)
"Hey Joe, Philadelphia and New York Yankees are having some offensive problems this year. Do you think they should make a move to get a batter like B.J. Upton or do you think they should stick with what they have? It doesn't look like either team will make the playoffs, much less the World Series at this point!"
Joe Morgan: I didn't really find B.J. Upton to be offensive. He should have run after the ball a little bit faster. I think you are wrong though, Philadelphia and the Yankees won't meet in the World Series this year. It's too early to tell what the Yankees and Phillies will look to improve in the offseason.
I can completely see Joe answering my hypothetical question in this way.
kramer (ny)
Thoughts on Upton-Longoria situation?
JM: I don't know exactly what happened.
Thanks for chatting with us Joe. Glad you are here to answer these questions so well.
conshymatt (philly)
Who is the best defensive player in baseball?
This is BotB reader Matt, not Joebaiting, but asking an actual question...that won't get an answer.
JM: That's a tough question. I think there are a lot of good defensive players.
(Joe's brain) "Just kill time and hope the computer crashes. Maybe the world will end now. (waits for five seconds and the world doesn't end) Shit, now I have to answer this question."
You have to rate them by position.
You mean like how the Gold Gloves are awarded at each position? You could also just name a player, any player, that you consider to be the best defensive player in baseball.
I think they've done a good job the last few years, if you look at the gold glove winners.
NO ONE IS ASKING ABOUT HOW WELL THE COACHES AND MANAGERS HAVE DONE IN VOTING FOR GOLD GLOVE WINNERS! WHY DO YOU EXIST?
There might be one or two exceptions, but I think they've done a good job.
Matt asked who the best defensive player in the majors currently is and Joe Morgan answered that he thinks the Gold Glove winners have been well-selected over the last few years. This is why I think Joe died several years ago and has been replaced by an imposter. There's no way a person who takes 1% pride in his ability to understand baseball could answer this question so terribly.
Matt: Who is the best defensive player in baseball?
Imposter Joe Morgan: I don't fucking know who the hell that would be, but I know the Gold Glove winners seem like good defenders. Man, those coaches and managers seem to do a good job with that voting!
Scott (South Dakota)
Joe - any chance the Giants make some moves at the deadline to improve their playoff chances this year?
JM: The Giants are like all of the teams, they have weaknesses. Their offense is still suspect. You can't expect Lincecum and Cain, Sanchez, Zito and all the pitcher to hold the opposition to 2 or less runs every day.
We have covered that the Giants probably should make a move, but does Joe Morgan think the Giants will make a move?
(spoiler alert) We don't get an answer to this question.
They still need some consistent offense. But with that said, if you look around the NL West, all of the teams are suspect.
So the Giants don't need to make a move because every team in the division isn't a perfect team? So the Giants have the same problem as all the other teams in the NL West. Does this even mean anything? Why can't Joe just answer the question?
Has anyone at ESPN ever tried to talk to Joe about answering the question posed?
(ESPN executive) "Joe, we need you to read the question and then answer the question asked. Our commenters are getting upset at you."
(Joe Morgan) "I am not upset with anyone. I enjoy working here at ESPN."
(ESPN executive getting a headache) "When a question is asked, try your best to answer the question that is being asked. Just do it for 30 minutes and we will buy you an ice cream cone. Deal?"
(Joe Morgan) "I will answer the question posed to me. I would love to have some ice cream, let's go!"
(ESPN executive throws himself down a flight of stairs)
ross (kentucky)
Joe, Whats your thoughts on Brandon Phillips? I believe as far as OVERALL he is the best 2B in the NL. No one is close defensively, he will steal you a base was a 30/30 guy and hits for power.
JM: I think you're exactly right. He's the best overall 2B in the league at this moment. He's played much, much better the last few weeks.
Let's get this straight. Joe won't even hear of the argument that Joey Votto is playing as well as Albert Pujols this year, even though the statistics back it up, but Brandon Phillips outperforms Chase Utley for one year and now all of a sudden he is the best second baseman in the league at this moment? How the hell did this just happen? I don't care how Joe judges the best player at each position, just be consistent with it. The Inconsistency Monster is very angry with Joe right now. He's dragging his bat along the base of Joe's bedroom door in a threatening manner.
Joe refused to even think about the idea Votto may be having as good of a year as Pujols, though it was shown in the statistics included with the question that this was true. Based on the fact Chase Utley is having a sub-par year Joe thinks Brandon Phillips is the best second baseman in the NL.
Utley this year: .277/.383/.466, 11 HR, 37 RBIs, 126 OPS+
Phillips this year: .313/.371/.481, 9 HR, 25 RBIs, 127 OPS+
Phillips is playing slightly better than Utley, but it is very, very close. I can't believe Joe is jumping on the Brandon Phillips bandwagon while he sticks with Pujols to the very bitter end. Plus, Chase Utley is injured right now, so I am sure that had to contribute in some way to his sub-par year.
He has shown that he has great ability.
So has Chase Utley. He has shown he is a better second baseman than Brandon Phillips over the long-term. So based on Joe's previous indignant answer that Votto is not as good as Pujols or shouldn't get the respect Pujols gets, Joe should still consider Utley better than Phillips.
I'm not saying this is a correct point of view, but is how Joe's brain should work.
Derek (Plymouth)
How do the red sox stay in contention with so many players out due to injury?
JM: You have to look at them staying in contention with New York.
Sorry Tampa Bay. You may be a few games back for the division lead, but Joe Morgan doesn't think you stand a chance to win the division. He really has no reason to think this, other than there is a 95% chance he hasn't seen the Rays play this year.
JM: I think after the all-star break, we will have a better feel for the teams that could win their division.
Joe thinks as the season comes closer to ending it will be easier to tell which teams could win their division. This statement is pretty much the definition of an obvious statement. Joe already has a feel if Tampa can win the AL East and the answer is they can not.
Some teams will go to the front of the class. We'll see if I'm correct, but I do think there will be some separation.
We will see if Joe is right or not that there will be some separation. Joe will be correct and some teams will win their division, either that, or all of the divisions will end up tied at the end of the year, leading to six one-game playoffs to determine which teams are in the playoffs.
This is classic Joe Morgan. He is telling us if the divisions don't all end up tied, some teams will end up with better records than other teams.
8 comments:
so the Buzzmaster was unable to locate Joe today! he was probably hiding in a closet for fear of the IM (inconsistency monster).
joe's lack of consistency is troubling. that whole pujols/votto vs. utley/phillips thing was too much. of course, ben, you're forgetting that when it comes to Reds players (former or current) joe loses what small sense of reason that clings to his pea sized brain.
it's too bad - my queston was 2 part with the second part about advanced defensive stats like UZR and OOZ. after reading my question joe probably asked the buzzmaster to block any futre queries from conshy matt. either that or he was confused: "this is a baseball chat not a horror movie chat. what's with these questions about razors and ooze?"
You have to look at them staying in contention with New York. The Yankees have been in first place without great production from A-Rod, who's getting hot, without great production for Teixiera. Jeter hasn't been consistent. AJ Burnett hasn't pitched well recently. Yet they're still in first place and will probably get better. They have to try and stay close to the Yankees and I think it will be difficult for them to do that, with those injuries.
Joe's full answer to the Red Sox question does not mention the Red Sox at all. he also really loves the Yankees.
ivn, he may love the yankees, but....(from last week's chat)
What do you think is the Yankees biggest weakness this year?
JM: Their offense is not as good as I'd thought.
Cano is having a great year, and Swisher has done well early on, but can you count on him to be the guy?
I thought they would win a lot because of their starters and offense, but none of that seems to be consistent right now. That's why they went into last night with a one-game lead over Boston.
Mr. Consistency himself!
potential and Jurgens and Hanson get back on track, I think they can hold on
Who in the fuck is Jurgens? I think Joe gave a little too much information here. Someone really likes their lotions.
Also the Braves are +61 in run differential this year, even with Jurrjens and Hanson struggling.
This isn't a spelling contest, but shouldn't Joe at least spell the player's names correctly since he is presumably an "expert" on baseball?
Or you know, because they were fucking teammates.
I don't think you can just point to the money factor. In most cases, the Yankees have spent their money wise.
Carl Pavano would like to have a word with Joe, as would Kevin Brown and Javier Vazquez.
I don't understand how "money" isn't the issue. You give a team 200 million for the payroll, anyone could put together a team that wins. It's hard to spend wisely when you have 10 million to spend on 6 players. It's not hard to spend wisely when you're pretty much guaranteed a guy who is really good.
JM: I think after the all-star break, we will have a better feel for the teams that could win their division.
This is really stupid. Has Joe looked at the standings lately? Every division has a huge discrepency after 2 or 3 teams.
AL East: Drop off b/w Boston and Toronto (8 games)
AL Central: Drop off b/w Chicago and KC (7 games)
AL West: Drop off after LA (4.5 games)
NL East: Drop off after Philly (4.5 games)
NL Central: Drop off after St. Louis (8.5 games)
NL West: Only one team is out of it (Arizona 10.5 back of SF)
There's also only one division where the second place team is within 2 games of first (AL Central). The problem with baseball is that the good teams are really good and the shitty teams are really shitty. The NL central has four teams below .500 and two teams below .400!
There are 4 teams with run differentials between -20 and +20, but 6 teams with run differentials greater that +/-90.
Going into the money thing a little deeper:
Just because a contract looks "wise" now, doesn't mean that it'll be wise at the end of it.
For example, in 2016 and 2017 ARod is due 20M. Will he be a good player then? Maybe, maybe not. The Yankees don't give a shit because they're willing to suck those years down in order to have ARod during his prime.
Basically, the Yankees (and Red Sox, Mets and Phillies) all sign these guys to contracts and dare other teams to match them. Obviously, most teams can't afford to have a 20M player sucking, so they'll just pass on them. As a result, these players go to a big time team and when their productivity starts to diminish, they'll just eat the salary and sign someone to replace them.
Think about Prince Fielder. If the Brewers sign him for 18-20M and he just falls apart in 2-3 years, they're screwed. If he goes to another team, it's not such a big deal.
Matt, I saw that. I wonder where Joe was? I bet he just bailed on the Buzzmaster.
What kills me is that Joe wasn't defending a Reds player but was saying Votto wasn't one of the best players. That blew my mind. I thought for sure he would defend both Reds players. There is no way he can justify those two positions, at least not in my mind.
I would love to hear Joe answer a question about UZR.
Ivn, I guess it is too much to ask for a question about the Red Sox to involve an answer about the Red Sox. I think the only thing Joe loves is not making sense when he types.
Rich, I have no idea who Jurgens is. The J.R. Richards thing is killing me.
Joe completely ignored the money aspect of the question. The Yankees have done better of late in choosing players for their team, but there is also a line of guys who got paid a lot to play for the Yankees and busted. The Yankees have the ability to miss on a highly paid player and not have it destroy their payroll. You are right that other teams can't do that.
Rich, I am 96% sure Joe did not look at the standings. He would have no idea what run differential is, but would definitely have a strong opinion on why it is a terrible measurement. I like your point though, teams have already pulled ahead in the divisions.
On the deeper look at the money, it is the same thing with NBA teams. The Celtics just paid Paul Pierce a ton of money on the back end of his contract in the hopes the front end makes up for it.
The teams with the higher payrolls can suck down a diminished A-Rod making $20 million while other teams can't do that. You are right. I am not saying it is a huge problem, but in answering the question Joe completely doesn't talk about this.
buzzmater said "Looks like Joe got tied up this morning...Just heard that Joe is on a plane right now. But we've rescheduled for 11 a.m. ET on Wednesday."
see that, they actually tried to have the real Joe make an appearance for today's chat, but they forgot he was tied up and kidnapped on a plane heading to who knows where. So now it will be imposter Joe for Wednesday.
Anon, I bet that did happen. They had to get Imposter Joe in the chat and he probably wasn't available today...or perhaps he has escaped.
We'll know for sure tomorrow if Joe comes out not answering questions and just generally being a pain in the ass. That's the imposter.
Post a Comment