Author Topic: ESPN: A new low  (Read 3880 times)

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
ESPN: A new low
« on: July 31, 2007, 11:39:45 am »
Quote
Tom - New York, NY: What is happening with Morgan Ensberg?

 Jonah Keri: (10:18 AM ET ) 29 other teams should think about offering 30 cents on the dollar and stashing him away, that's what. Ensberg must have either run over Phil Garner's dog or slept with his sister, he was never going to get a fair shake in Houston. Now mind you, Ensberg's bad shoulder and general struggles are pretty obvious. But still, Houston's done a great job of killing his trade value.

Wow.  Just... wow.

But I loved this later exchange:

Quote
Jonah Keri: (11:01 AM ET ) Lightning round, Joe Morgan's on deck, and I'm not the best second baseman ever to play the game...

Paul (Sioux City, Ia): Nap Lajoie is waiting to start a chat. Wow........

(Note: this is an ongoing chat through the deadline.)

http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=16703
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Phil_in_CS

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1511
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2007, 12:52:19 pm »
Keri's comments are amazing.

At least we know that the Chronical doesn't have a complete corner on the market of fuckwits acting like sports writers.

ybbodeus

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3041
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2007, 01:55:59 pm »
Give 'em time, Phil.
"(512) ybbodeus looks just as creepy in HD as in person."   That is a problem, and we are working on it.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2007, 02:11:31 pm »
It continues:

Roger (Austin, TX): Ensberg must've run over Garner's cat or slept with his sister? I think it's the other way around. Tim Purpura kept him around as his value plummeted and Garner kept running him into the lineup after her continued to hit .230 over the last year. Ensberg did not get a raw deal. The Astros gave him too many opportunities if anything.

Jonah Keri: (2:39 PM ET) He just needed to be spotted correctly. Ensberg against all lefties and softer righties, and Lamb against legit righties would've netted some nice numbers. I don't think Ensberg is a star by any means, but I do think he'd be a very useful part-time player.

FYI, Ensberg batted .259/.330/.459 against lefties this year and .245/.463/.553 against lefties last year. Was that enough to justify keeping him on the roster?

JimR

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 29345
    • View Profile
    • McGinnis, Lochridge & Kilgore, LLP
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2007, 02:16:00 pm »
It continues:

Roger (Austin, TX): Ensberg must've run over Garner's cat or slept with his sister? I think it's the other way around. Tim Purpura kept him around as his value plummeted and Garner kept running him into the lineup after her continued to hit .230 over the last year. Ensberg did not get a raw deal. The Astros gave him too many opportunities if anything.

Jonah Keri: (2:39 PM ET) He just needed to be spotted correctly. Ensberg against all lefties and softer righties, and Lamb against legit righties would've netted some nice numbers. I don't think Ensberg is a star by any means, but I do think he'd be a very useful part-time player.

FYI, Ensberg batted .259/.330/.459 against lefties this year and .245/.463/.553 against lefties last year. Was that enough to justify keeping him on the roster?

where has Keri managed?
Often wrong, but never in doubt.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #5 on: July 31, 2007, 02:16:47 pm »
where has Keri managed?

I don't know. I wasn't nominating him to manage anywhere. What does that have to do with anything?

matadorph

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #6 on: July 31, 2007, 02:17:51 pm »
This horseshit is largely the consequence of the proliferation of SABRcentric websites and fantacrap pabulum. I've had a running argument about Ensberg on another website dating back to the middle of last year. Apparently Mo has many fans who consider their opinions about his play informed on the basis of their ability to use baseballreference.com without having to watch a single Astros game.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #7 on: July 31, 2007, 02:20:09 pm »
This horseshit is largely the consequence of the proliferation of SABRcentric websites and fantacrap pabulum. I've had a running argument about Ensberg on another website dating back to the middle of last year. Apparently Mo has many fans who consider their opinions about his play informed on the basis of their ability to use baseball-reference.com without having to watch a single Astros game.

FIFY.

Bench

  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 16476
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #8 on: July 31, 2007, 02:22:42 pm »
FIFY.

Wow. I didn't know "FIFY" could be appropriately used without humor.
"Holy shit, Mozart. Get me off this fucking thing."

Lumpus

  • Disappointing Rookie
  • Posts: 36
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #9 on: July 31, 2007, 02:24:31 pm »
ESPN is saying Ensberg to SD
(didn't hear details)

Astroholic

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3807
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #10 on: July 31, 2007, 02:25:00 pm »
ESPN is saying Ensberg to SD
(didn't hear details)

Thanks for the news......clark

JimR

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 29345
    • View Profile
    • McGinnis, Lochridge & Kilgore, LLP
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #11 on: July 31, 2007, 02:26:02 pm »
This horseshit is largely the consequence of the proliferation of SABRcentric websites and fantacrap pabulum. I've had a running argument about Ensberg on another website dating back to the middle of last year. Apparently Mo has many fans who consider their opinions about his play informed on the basis of their ability to use baseballreference.com without having to watch a single Astros game.

you just described BP's formula for success.
Often wrong, but never in doubt.

JimR

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 29345
    • View Profile
    • McGinnis, Lochridge & Kilgore, LLP
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #12 on: July 31, 2007, 02:27:34 pm »
I don't know. I wasn't nominating him to manage anywhere. What does that have to do with anything?

"Jonah Keri: (2:39 PM ET) He just needed to be spotted correctly. Ensberg against all lefties and softer righties,"

don't be dense
Often wrong, but never in doubt.

Col. Sphinx Drummond

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 16760
  • art is a bulwark against the irrationality of man
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #13 on: July 31, 2007, 02:33:51 pm »
"Jonah Keri: (2:39 PM ET) He just needed to be spotted correctly. Ensberg against all lefties and softer righties,"

don't be dense

"SportsNation Jonah Keri: (3:26 PM ET ) Don't know yet, Erik. I'm waiting to hear too. I would bet it's not much...Houston killed his trade value."
Everyone's talking, few of them know
The rest are pretending, they put on a show
And if there's a message I guess this is it
Truth isn't easy, the easy part's shit

Noe

  • Guest
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #14 on: July 31, 2007, 02:36:23 pm »
"SportsNation Jonah Keri: (3:26 PM ET ) Don't know yet, Erik. I'm waiting to hear too. I would bet it's not much...Houston killed his trade value."


He must have his computer set to voice recognition and he pre-taped what he was going to say about Ensberg.  The tape starts as soon as it recognizes the name Ensberg being typed and fills in the answer dialogue box with "... Houston killed his trade value".  I would love the damn thing to get stuck and just repeat over and over and over again: "Houston killed his trade value... Houston killed his trade value... Houston killed his trade value...."  Nice!

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #15 on: July 31, 2007, 02:41:22 pm »
"Jonah Keri: (2:39 PM ET) He just needed to be spotted correctly. Ensberg against all lefties and softer righties,"

don't be dense

I'm not being dense. I just don't care about who Keri is or whether he's ever managed. I could really care less.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #16 on: July 31, 2007, 02:43:00 pm »
"SportsNation Jonah Keri: (3:26 PM ET ) Don't know yet, Erik. I'm waiting to hear too. I would bet it's not much...Houston killed his trade value."


Ever since November 2006.

JimR

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 29345
    • View Profile
    • McGinnis, Lochridge & Kilgore, LLP
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #17 on: July 31, 2007, 02:44:04 pm »
I just don't care about who Keri is or whether he's ever managed. I could really care less.

you're being dense again.
Often wrong, but never in doubt.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2007, 02:53:34 pm »
you're being dense again.

Not at all. I just don't subscribe to a line of reasoning that seeks to discredit the messenger without ever addressing the message. I don't care for Keri or any of his colleagues at BP, and I think his assertion that the Astros have wrecked Ensberg's trade value is preposterous. But that would be the case regardless of whether he'd managed the Yankees, a Little League team or his local McDonald's. I simply don't place the same amount of emphasis on credentials that you do.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: ESPN: A new low
« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2007, 02:54:55 pm »
you're being dense again.

Let me put it another way, Jim. If he had managed at a relatievly competitive level, would that make his statement that the Astros wrecked Ensberg's trade value any less ludicrous?