Stuart Scott: Two Wya Reevew

Stuart Scott does a chat about every two weeks on ESPN.com (called the two-way). It’s usually pretty non-eventful and is riddled with typos and not so new analysis on subjects. Somehow ESPN the Magazine thinks it worth using in the magazine. I can only think he’s typing this up on a blackberry at a block party somewhere with Pookie and Ray-Ray. Let’s look at a few of Stuart’s answers from this week.

jamie (shaker heights): will glavin be the last 300-game winner in our lifetime?

Stuart Scott: (11:01 AM ET ) I tthink Randy Jophnson has a slim chance, but beyond that, I can't see any more than a lot of middle and late relievers and closers.

I will give you two American Dollars if you can tell me what the hell he’s talking about. I’m not going into the 300 game winner thing….again, but if you read that without guessing at his point it sounds like we’ll mostly see middle relievers and closers winning 300 games. Clearly not his point, but his point wasn’t clear.

joe (jamaica plains): it's tough not to like the Sox getting gagne, but their problem this year seems more hitting than pitching. What do you think?

Stuart Scott: (11:03 AM ET ) I think pitching wins championships. True the Sox aren't hitting, but if Eric is anywhere close near to the 82? saves he had a few years ago, the Sox are in good shape.

I realize that it’s common to put a question mark after something that you’re a little unsure about. But couldn't he take 30 seconds and clarify what he is saying? It sounds like he's saying 82 saves in a season. I realize now that he must mean Gagne's streak of 84 straight saves. But clearly Gagne is not THAT good this year. If he thinks Gagne saved 82 games in a year, that’s like saying; “well if Barry Bonds can put together another 115? Homerun season the Giants will be all set.”

Also, Boston is 5th in the Major Leagues in runs scored. Third since the All-Star break. Last year’s World Series champs were 16th in ERA during the regular season.

laurel (cherry hill nj): Seen the simpsons movie? How do you rate it?

Stuart Scott: (11:09 AM ET ) i've never even watched an episode. Never even 30 seconds of one. Nothing personal, just never got around to it.

This further supports how/why Stuart Scott and myself are the exact opposites in every way.

ariel (frankfurt germany): are you down with the Harry Potter series Stuart--movies or books--

Stuart Scott: (11:20 AM ET ) my oldest daughter is a bifg fan. Soi I haer about them from her. At Holloween, I was Dumbledore even though I didn't really know hwho he was til I did it with beard and cape.

I just left this in so you didn’t think I was exaggerating about typos and him not making sense.

He’s either:

A. On a blackberry
B. He can’t type
C. He’s dictating his answers to someone who doesn’t speak Stuart Scott (credit to Bill Simmons).
D. Booyah!

jerry: We know the Yanks and Sox watch each others moves very carefully, but do you thinik when a team like the Celts trades for a KG, it puts pressure on a team like the Red Sox to make a move as well, b/c of the fans?

Stuart Scott: (11:22 AM ET ) No I think its the other way around . The Sox don't feel pressure, but Boston fans do feel angst about any move any Boston or NY team makes. When the Pats won the first SB, fans ran around NO yelling Yankees suck Yankees suck. There's something wrong there, but they do hav ehelp for those kinds of problems.

I agree that Yankees suck chants are stupid at non-Yankees related events. Like the one we started at a wedding ceremony last month. But, see, Jerry is acknowledging that the Sox and Yankees watch each other, and his question was just about Boston teams watching other Boston teams. Booyah!

Bobby (ohio): do you think griffey can pass bonds?

Stuart Scott: (11:23 AM ET ) no, no way. Junior' s on e of the best players ever, but cmon. It's too late.

Yeah Bobby, what are you….stupid? Booyah!

Randy(Knoxville,TN): Fair point....but if you add a Mark Jackson/Rod Strickland type, and a P.J. Brown type, you likely win 65+ games....even if your bench is weak. Ask MJ if it cant work. Who was Jud Buechler anyway?

Stuart Scott: (11:26 AM ET ) i though you were a Mark Jackson type. That's why I put you in the lineup.

I am on a roll today….take that Randy! Booyah! Doesn’t make sense? What? Well boo-fucking-yah! Did that make sense?

The crazy thing is that Randy’s question was pretty stupid and easy to argue with. Mark Jackson/Rod Strickland types aren’t really available and are expensive if they are, and Jud Buechler was like the 11th man on those Bulls teams. They had much better complementary guards than him.