Steve Phillips disses McCann's power... McCann goes yard.

Coincidence, or the baseball gods telling Phillips to shut his hole?

You be the judge.






(PS, Francoeur homer, Schafer homer in first MLB at-bat!!!! Braves will win the World Series!!!!)

[/homerism]

Go Braves! Nice to see Schafer hit that one.

I laughed when this happened :D

Phillips is a *****. Whenever he says something I immediately assume the opposite is correct, and usually I'm right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YEAH DAAAAWG

Phillips is a *****. Whenever he says something I immediately assume the opposite is correct, and usually I'm right.

---

I heard he thinks highly of the Red Sox this year. RUH ROH!

Anytime Steve Phillips is on, all I can hear is,

"blah blah blah I traded for Mo Vaughn cause I suck blah blah"

In a room. Joe Morgan and Steve Phillips.
Who comes out alive?

Joe Morgan.

At least he knows how to swing a baseball bat.

Haha.
I was gonna say Matt Wieters

Is there anybody on TV you guys like?

Anthony Bourdain

I think at this point Steven Colbert is more a more credible than either of the above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reflections

Anthony Bourdain

---

I agree, he is awesome. Maybe he should become an analyst

The problem is that these guys AREN'T analysts, and attempt to analyze, and fail miserably at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

The problem is that these guys AREN'T analysts, and attempt to analyze, and fail miserably at it.

---

They should not be involved in covering sports AT ALL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies

They should not be involved in covering sports AT ALL

---

Depends on who you're talking about. Most people have their strengths and weaknesses. Nearly all of the mainstream television "analysts" are not actual analysts though, and look dumb when attempting analysis. If they focused on using ex-players and what not to give insight into the game situations, the clubhouse, etc. they absolutely should be involved in covering sports. They shouldn't be involved in analysis, though, which is what they currently are used as.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Depends on who you're talking about. Most people have their strengths and weaknesses. Nearly all of the mainstream television "analysts" are not actual analysts though, and look dumb when attempting analysis. If they focused on using ex-players and what not to give insight into the game situations, the clubhouse, etc. they absolutely should be involved in covering sports. They shouldn't be involved in analysis, though, which is what they currently are used as.

---

I can't think of any good ex-player analysts at the moment. Maybe Barry Larkin..

Ive always liked Steve Lyons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies

I can't think of any good ex-player analysts at the moment. Maybe Barry Larkin..

---

Like I said, because they're used as ANALYSTS when they shouldn't be. Barry Larkin's strengths aren't analyzing players and teams. His strengths are knowing how to play baseball, knowing the ins and outs of in-game situations, etc. He shouldn't be used to analyze players and teams and what not.

Who's worse: Joe Morgan, or Charles Barkley?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5dodgers5

Who's worse: Joe Morgan, or Charles Barkley?

---

Man thats trbl.

Well as Michael Jordan would say. Chuck can't talk cause he doesn't have the Jewelry and Joe Morgan does.