Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Game Chatter > Discussion
Game Chatter
— Where Thinking Fans Discuss Today's Games

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Old Matt Posted: September 08, 2005 at 02:55 PM (#1604621)
The Mets, alas, are not.

I think I am going to have nightmares from the past three days for the next four years.
   2. Old Matt Posted: September 08, 2005 at 03:52 PM (#1604744)
Luckily, things could be worse. Starting lineup from a year ago today:

1. Valent rf
2. Delgado ss
3. Floyd lf
4. Piazza 1b
5. Wright 3b
6. Cameron cf
7. Phillips c
8. Keppinger 2b
9. Seo p
   3. Sam M. Posted: September 08, 2005 at 04:27 PM (#1604802)
I think I am going to have nightmares from the past three days for the next four years.

What good timing! Just in time to replace the nightmares from the last time a Mets closer blew two late-inning, one-run leads to the Braves in Atlanta in a huge late-season game.

Turner Field: where Mets' teams go to die.
   4. Rob Base Posted: September 08, 2005 at 04:55 PM (#1604847)
I wish I were deceased.
   5. Benji Posted: September 08, 2005 at 05:37 PM (#1604951)
I think it's consensus that Looper can't be our closer any more. But if we can't sign Wagner or Ryan, do we have an internal option? Could it be Heilman? Whoever it is, he HAS to be a strikeout pitcher. Any ideas?
   6. 1k5v3L Posted: September 08, 2005 at 05:38 PM (#1604956)
Bert?
   7. Benji Posted: September 08, 2005 at 05:44 PM (#1604972)
He'd only be a real short-term solution. And I wish it had been this year. If he had replaced Looper and Peterson had allowed Seo to be there all year we'd still have hope. Oh well.
   8. villainx Posted: September 08, 2005 at 05:45 PM (#1604976)
The closer job should be Heilman's for the remainder of the season. The Mets should see if they have an internal solution and Heilman could be it.

The same with Jacob and 1st base (or atleast to see if he can hit enough to be worth spending the winter training for the catcher position).
   9. Sam M. Posted: September 08, 2005 at 06:03 PM (#1605011)
I think it’s consensus that Looper can’t be our closer any more.

Almost. I would love to see the Mets take a page from the '80s and develop a two-headed, righty/lefty closer platoon. Braden Looper could easily be the Roger McDowell half, used when the circumstances call for a righty. We don't necessarily need a new closer; we need half a closer, the latter-day Jesse Orosco.
   10. villainx Posted: September 08, 2005 at 06:12 PM (#1605032)
I would love to see the Mets take a page from the ‘80s and develop a two-headed, righty/lefty closer platoon.

We are already in a new century. Come join us.

Or I don't think Willie or most GM/manager would institute that. And I do not think they should. If Looper can only be used situationally, then let him setup, those are sometimes more important innings anyway. And if you get someone for the Orosco half, let him setup too. But otherwise, get a real closer (or develop one).
   11. Sam M. Posted: September 08, 2005 at 06:21 PM (#1605057)
We are already in a new century. Come join us.

No! I won't, and you can't make me!!! I'm going to stay right here, pretending it's September 1986, and Braden -- er, Roger -- McDowell is being used when the opposition has three righties coming up in the 9th (or two righties and a slap-hitting lefty second-baseman).

But otherwise, get a real closer (or develop one).

That would be fine, too. But my point is really that they don't necessarily HAVE to go that route. Looper has his uses, which can include closing in the right situations. Put him together with the right partner, and you'd have something. The Mets got 209 innings of closer-quality relief out of McRosco in 1986. Neither would have been as effective without the other.
   12. AJMcCringleberry Posted: September 08, 2005 at 06:23 PM (#1605059)
LOOPER SUCKS ASS!!! HOW DO YOU PUT SHINGO ####### TAKATSU IN THE GAME WITH THE BASES LOADED AND NO OUTS!!! #### YOU WILLIE!!!

Sorry, I needed to get that out.
   13. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 08, 2005 at 06:31 PM (#1605088)
Reposted from the previous thread:

The offseason needs are as follow:

1. Cleanup hitter.
2. Closer (BJ Ryan).
3. Second-baseman.
4. Starting pitcher (AJ)
5. Setup man (*).

That sounds like a rather large list, but the Mets have both the money and the talent to get it done. Just at the major league level they have two expandable starting pitchers, and a gold glove CF. In the minors we are loaded with pitching. Basically, anyone but Milledge, should be available at the right price. Feel free to fill in the blanks for 1, 3, and 5.

(*): This might not be quite as obvious as the others, but its becoming increasingly clear that if Roberto Hernandez falters next year, we are going to be ####. Can you imagine Randolph going day after day and blown lead after blown lead to Hernandez even when its clear he’s not getting it done just because he was so good this year? I can. I don't want to see that happen.
   14. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 08, 2005 at 06:40 PM (#1605109)
But my point is really that they don’t necessarily HAVE to go that route. Looper has his uses, which can include closing in the right situations. Put him together with the right partner, and you’d have something.

In the perfect world, our manager would be able to pull this off. But do you think Randolph could manage to know when to use Looper and when to take him out? So far in 2005, I can't remember a single instance in which Randolph took out a reliever who was performing well because the following hitters created problems. Case and point: Takatsu yesterday. The right move would have been to let Takatsu pitch to the first 2 hitters, and then go to the LHP to face the LHB. But since Takatsu got the first two, Randolph felt compelled to stick with him. I wouldn't be completely oppossed to the idea of bringing back Looper as the right-handed part of a setup combo, but I'm not sure I'd pick up the $5MM option on him. I'd much rather buy him out, hope he signs elsewhere as the closer and get two top 40 draft picks.
   15. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 08, 2005 at 07:07 PM (#1605217)
I posted this on MG, but I guess its relevant here too:

The Royals designated Calvin Pickering for assignment today. The left-handed first-baseman has struggled at the major league level hitting .223/.329/.428 in 264 career ABs. But coming into the year, he had a .303/.407/.558 career line as a minor leaguer. Last year, Pickering destroyed AAA as he had a Barry Bonds-like .314/.451/.712 line to go along with 35 HRs and 70 walks in only 299 ABs. This year, the 29 year old is hitting .275/.384/.528 with 23 HRs in 335 ABs at Omaha. Needless to say, he's worth a shot. Pickering is obviously not a long-term answer, but he would be terrific insurance in case our first-baseman next year goes down with injury or pulls a Mientkiewicz on us.
   16. Sam M. Posted: September 08, 2005 at 07:24 PM (#1605287)
In the perfect world, our manager would be able to pull this off. But do you think Randolph could manage to know when to use Looper and when to take him out?

A problem, no doubt. Undoubtedly, the most direct, simplest solution is to get a Grade A, full-time closer. That would be relatively Randolph-proof.

All the Looper-bashing, however, seems to me to be a classic case of focusing on a player's weaknesses, and what he can't do, rather than on what he CAN do. Good managers put their players in situations where they are likely to succeed. There are many situations where Looper CAN succeed, but Randolph hasn't limited his use to primarily be in those situations. That's Randolph's fault, not Looper's.

To me, if we just dump Looper, it means we're still going to need a right-handed guy pretty much like him: someone who can handle the set-up duties for which a righty is the best option and step in to close when that is called for. We could hope the 41-year old Hernandez is as good as the 40-year old version, but that doesn't strike me as the wisest gamble. I'd keep Looper around to do what he can do.
   17. Old Matt Posted: September 08, 2005 at 07:55 PM (#1605407)
The closer job should be Heilman’s for the remainder of the season. The Mets should see if they have an internal solution and Heilman could be it.

I agree 100%.
   18. cynic Posted: September 08, 2005 at 08:00 PM (#1605447)
I don't disagree, Sam, but is that really the best way to spend $5M? And if you decline the option and offer him arbitration, do you expect to get much of a discount from that $5M? Take a look at his comparables in the categories that matter to arbitrators:

Hoffman: 36/38 saves, 3.28 ERA, $5M
Batista, 26/32 saves, 3.53 ERA, $4.75M
LOOPER: 28/34 saves, 3.70 ERA
Cordero: 31/39 saves, 3.62 ERA, $3.875M

I basically eyeballed the ESPN stats search, sorted by saves, and picked guys close to Looper in saves and ERA. I think Braden and his agent would be justified in asking for 4.3M. I also don't think he's worth it, not because a good setup guy isn't worth 4.3M to a big-market team, but because of the likelihood that Randolph will use him inappropriately due to his status as both a veteran and a proven closer.

I guess I'd be ok with declining the option and offering him arbitration, hoping that some other team offers him something like $7/2 to close, which I'd imagine he'd take over $4/1 to be BJ Ryan's setup guy.
   19. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 08:04 PM (#1605469)
I'm not against keeping Looper around as a ROOGY but not at the 5 million dollars he's going to make next season, and if the Mets buy him out I don't think he'll return to be the set-up man. There are two premier closers available this offseason, BJ Ryan and Billy Wagner. There's also guys like Tom Gordon and Ugueth Urbina who I personally think would be better options than Looper as well. Ideally, the Mets sign Ryan or Wagner and Gordon as well.

If the Mets sign Wagner or Ryan, I'll be very comfortable with the Met bullpen next season. Hernandez probably won't be as great as he was this season but he still should be good because his stuff is still outstanding. Heilman has been outstanding in relief and more can be expected from Bell and Padilla.
   20. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 08:19 PM (#1605526)
Heilman has been outstanding in relief and more can be expected from Bell and Padilla.

I actually don't want to rely on Padilla all that much. He's got some minor league stats but the guy has nothing stuffwise.

Assuming the Mets sign Ryan or Wagner, here's the bullpen guys the Mets have for next season.

Wagner or Ryan
Heilman
Hernandez
Bell
Padilla
Takatsu
Hamulack
Ring
McGinley

I could live with that bullpen. And before hating on Takatsu, he did have a good season last year and I don't think he should be judged based on two performances in extremely difficult situations is fair. He's definitely worth a shot.
   21. cynic Posted: September 08, 2005 at 08:25 PM (#1605554)
Also, OFF, either I am forgetting someone or I think you are overstating the Mets' assets at the ML level. Cameron may be a GG CF, but I believe he is still underrated by the majority of GM's due to his low contact rate. I think he's a perfect fit for the Angels but he doesn't really seem to fit their mold.

I believe the two expendable starting pitchers you're referring to are Ishii and Zambrano. Now, fourth and fifth starters don't exactly grow on trees, and their contracts are reasonable, but I really don't see anybody giving the Mets much for these guys. Maybe as part of a package?

My other interpretation is that the signing of Burnett makes another starter expendable. I would disagree. The combined injury risks of Pedro, AJ, Glavine, and Trachsel, added to the fact that neither Bannister nor Petit look quite ready, would make me want to carry six starters, because I'm sure to need more than five.
   22. villainx Posted: September 08, 2005 at 08:31 PM (#1605576)
The ideal situation for me is that Heilman proves to be able to handle the job, Looper can setup, Hernandez/Bell/Padilla/whoever can setup, and the Mets can spend less to get another reliable setup person (lefty/righty isn't as important as quality). I don't think Looper is that bad, and if he sets up, it'll only help with the depth of the bullpen.

With the money they save not going for Wagner, the upgrade for real in one or several of the RF, 1B, 2B position. The preference would be either 1B and/or RF so that it can carry Matsui.

Everyone in the bullpen (except for Heilman), Trax, Cameron, Zambrano will be prime trade bait for either a 1B, RF, 2B, pitcher upgrade.
   23. cynic Posted: September 08, 2005 at 08:36 PM (#1605594)
Also, I forgot to mention that I imagine GM's will be wary of trading for Cameron because nobody knows how he'll recover from the collision.
   24. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 08:45 PM (#1605616)
My other interpretation is that the signing of Burnett makes another starter expendable. I would disagree. The combined injury risks of Pedro, AJ, Glavine, and Trachsel, added to the fact that neither Bannister nor Petit look quite ready, would make me want to carry six starters, because I’m sure to need more than five.

Heilman could be moved to the rotation and I think Bannister is ready to step up in case of injury. Bannister is having a great season this year. Between AA and AAA, his numbers are:

13-5, 2.74 ERA, 8.28 k/9, 3.55 k/bb, .64 hr/9.

He was even better in AAA.

45.1 IP, 48 k, 13 bb, and no homers allowed.

BTW, Petit is going tonight against Zumaya and it's going to be broadcast at 6:15 eastern time.

Link
   25. Sam M. Posted: September 08, 2005 at 08:58 PM (#1605651)
here’s the bullpen guys the Mets have for next season.

Where have you gone Orber Moreno?
Mets' nation lifts its lonely eyes to you.
Whoo-whoo-whoo.
   26. cynic Posted: September 08, 2005 at 09:22 PM (#1605708)
Also, Bannister is 4-1 with a 3.18 ERA. That's all true, and in fact I was planning on giving him some MLB starts in 2006. But I believe that in general a team should have at least six viable MLB starters, and more if they have multiple starters among the six who are old, injury-prone, ineffectiveness-prone, or some combination of those. Thus, having just Bannister in case on injury to the top five doesn't really cut it with me.

With the money they save not going for Wagner

I'm not generally one of the people beating the "the Mets play in New York so fiscal restraint is irrelevant" drum, but the records I have indicate that the Met payroll currently stands at about $104M. They also spent about $8M on various buyouts, eating salary, etc. Even if they pick up all the possible options (and there are more than a few that seem unlikely: Mientkiewicz, Heredia, Looper, Ishii) and a couple of the arb-eligible guys (Zambrano, possibly Reyes, Castro, Woodward, Marlon) get raises, the 2006 payroll will only be about $95M. With the launch of the new network, I think it highly likely that Wilpon will authorize at least a $10M increase in payroll.

Basically, what I'm getting at is that the Mets can easily upgrade RF (Brian Giles?), 1B (Lyle Overbay?) *and* closer (BJ Ryan), should they be willing to spend a bit more than they are used to, both in terms of money and prospects.
   27. AJMcCringleberry Posted: September 08, 2005 at 09:24 PM (#1605714)
Wagner or Ryan
Heilman
Hernandez
Bell
Padilla
Takatsu
Hamulack
Ring
McGinley


Obviously they don't need a 9 man pen, so I would cut out Takatsu and two of the lefties. Then I would sign one of Hawkins, Gordon, or maybe Farnsworth (assuming they could spend the money, they wouldn't be a top priority). I think that would be a great pen.
   28. cynic Posted: September 08, 2005 at 09:32 PM (#1605732)
Somewhat interesting (perhaps only to me):

The Brewers have probably the most desirable 1B on the trade market, Lyle Overbay, who is young and doesn't become a free agent for some time. He has hit in only good to very good hitter's parks (ARI, MIL), but he provides good to very good production from 1B and plays good defense according to UZR. Looking at the shape of their roster, it looks like what they need is a couple of innings-eating starting pitchers (#3/4 types) and a reliever or two.

Reviewing the Angels' system through John Sickels' articles this year, it looks like they are very strong on middle infielders and 1B/DH types, not so hot with starting pitching. And, of course, they have a gaping hole in center field with the big-league club.

I think the Mets match up well with both teams and could figure something out that would be to the benefit of both clubs.
   29. AJMcCringleberry Posted: September 08, 2005 at 09:34 PM (#1605738)
1. Cleanup hitter.
2. Closer (BJ Ryan).
3. Second-baseman.
4. Starting pitcher (AJ)
5. Setup man (*).


My priorities for those positions
1. Giles
2. Ryan
3. Grudzielanek? Who else is there?
4. Burnett
5. Hawkins

I would also put first baseman on that list. There is no one on the free agent market that I'd be confortable with, so they would have to make a trade...Overbay, Kotchman? Arizona has a bunch of first baseman, right? They might be willing to part with someone good for an actual centerfielder in Cameron.
   30. Sam M. Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:18 PM (#1605882)
By the way, OFF -- you might want to check out the Wagner thread. You are figuring prominently.
   31. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:18 PM (#1605887)
What's up with this fascination with Overbay? He's hitting .273/.367/.445 in a hitter's park. Is he really all that much better Doug? He's already 28 years old. I'd rather let Jacobs and Diaz share the position and see what happens then engage in a bidding war for Overbay.
   32. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:22 PM (#1605897)
I believe that in general a team should have at least six viable MLB starters, and more if they have multiple starters among the six who are old, injury-prone, ineffectiveness-prone, or some combination of those.

I think Bannister, Petit and Heilman are more than enough insurance for the rotation. I wouldn't be against keeping Zambrano or Trachsel, but I think filling actual needs is more important than having insurance.

First base is definitely a hole, and the options there are slim. Overbay is decent, but I wouldn't overpay for a first-baseman whose OPS is 812 in Miller's Park. I don't like Konerko either, and I think he would be even more expensive.

Damn. Petit just allowed a 2 run-HR. Marcus Thames OWNS the Tides.
   33. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:28 PM (#1605914)
By the way, OFF—you might want to check out the Wagner thread. You are figuring prominently.

LMAO. Good stuff.
   34. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:28 PM (#1605916)
Thames is a monster at AAA. .340/.427/.679 this season.
   35. Keep your hand off my Poohole Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:35 PM (#1605933)
Ummm, I believe the Mets have an opponent in tonite's game. Best team in baseball and best pitcher in baseball. Shouldn't we be discussing the game?!?

Speaking of your Mets problems, I recall that Looper came up with the Cardinals, who traded him I think for Renteria, who gave us some excellent years before Boston overpaid for him. Speaking of your need for a closer, what about Pedro! You have extra starting pitchers, and Pedro in the 9th would be scary.

Speaking of Pedro, I am glad to see that the "Pedro for Cy Young" crap has died down.

I predict a 3-1 Cardinals win tonite, with Phat Albert doing most of the damage.
   36. Sam M. Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:40 PM (#1605946)
I believe the Mets have an opponent in tonite’s game. Best team in baseball and best pitcher in baseball.

And given those things, why, exactly, would we Mets' fans wish to contemplate -- much less discuss -- the actual game? Add in the fact that in the past 10 days or so our once-promising WC campaign has been brutally called to a halt . . .

Just think. On August 31, we were a half game out of the WC, and after two innings had a 2-0 lead on one of the teams ahead of us, with Pedro on the mound. Now . . . sigh.
   37. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:42 PM (#1605951)
Shouldn’t we be discussing the game?!?

What's to discuss?
The Cardinals? Awesome.
Carpenter? Awesome
The Mets? Not awesome.
   38. cynic Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:42 PM (#1605953)
RE: Overbay -- I'm not super-excited about him, but he's the only guy at 1B who's known to be available and whom I'd actually want. I agree that I wouldn't get in a bidding war for him, and if Arizona decided to make Conor Jackson available, I'd hang up the phone on Doug Melvin (though I'd call him back later and apologize for being rude).

RE: pitching, I dunno, I think that if you have five starters (and not someone like Zambrano in the pen), then Bannister is standard insurance. If your five starters include Pedro, AJ, and Glavine, then I'd want one more. Petit doesn't look ready and I'd rather not rush him, and I expect that Heilman will be a valuable part of the pen. And while I agree that filling needs is better than having insurance, I'm not really sure what back-of-the-rotation spare-parts type will get on the market.

Actually, I have an idea. Lemme go fetch levski and see what he'd be willing to trade Conor Jackson for.
   39. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:44 PM (#1605958)
You know, I'm done defending Randolph. What a complete idiot this guy is. Our offense has been horrendous in the past 10-12 games, so what does he do? He keeps writing the same lineup over and over again. Yeah, that'll work, Willie.

Seriously, why is Eyechart still playing? Why is Diaz batting 8th?
   40. cynic Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:44 PM (#1605959)
Ha ha, Russlan. Funny 'cuz it's true.

And nice try, Keep, but if you're going to try to hijack a thread, even if it is for its intended purpose, you're better off not trying it in a Met chatter.
   41. Sam M. Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:49 PM (#1605967)
but if you’re going to try to hijack a thread, even if it is for its intended purpose, you’re better off not trying it in a Met chatter.

Nah, not in this case. Once the game starts, the discussion will indeed turn in that direction. He's just jumping the gun, that's all.

(I'm off to class soon, so I'll join the "fun" sometime after 9:00.)
   42. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:50 PM (#1605971)
On August 31, we were a half game out of the WC, and after two innings had a 2-0 lead on one of the teams ahead of us, with Pedro on the mound. Now . . . sigh.

Seriously, it's too depressing to even think about.
   43. Keep your hand off my Poohole Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:54 PM (#1605980)
Do the Mets still use that catchy slogan -- Meet the Mets, Greet the Mets, Head to the park and Beat the Mets"?

I remember that from the "Mets are Pond Scum" days of the 80's. Anyone else remember that -- David Letterman had a table showing the comparison between the Mets and pond scum. The final item,

Mets -- 1 player named Mookie.
Pond Scum -- everybody named Mookie!!
   44. Sam M. Posted: September 08, 2005 at 10:58 PM (#1605992)
I remember that from the “Mets are Pond Scum” days of the 80’s.

Ah, yes. The 80s. The era in which Whitey Herzog gave up the race in the NL East one year . . . in June. In which the ugliest player in major league history also won the most undeserved MVP award in major league history. And in which a Cardinals' pitcher had a nervous breakdown right there on the mound in Game 7 of the World Series.

Good times.
   45. Keep your hand off my Poohole Posted: September 08, 2005 at 11:06 PM (#1606007)
The 80's. When the Cardinals went to 3 World Series, won it all in 1982. Got hosed by the strike in 1981 and by Don Denkinger in 1985 and by the Metrodome in 1987.

And the decade where the Cardinals won every close race with the Mets.

And the decade where I lost my virginity, but that's a different story altogether ...
   46. cynic Posted: September 08, 2005 at 11:11 PM (#1606025)
Hey OFF -- in response to your MG article/repost here, I wouldn't mind giving Pickering a shot at 1B, but given the way he's hit so far in his ML career and his age, wouldn't you rather get a guy who can actually play the position and have Pickering on the bench? And if you're going to have Pickering on the bench, is there really that much difference between Pickering and Jacobs?
   47. Dolph Lungren's Super Friend Posted: September 08, 2005 at 11:15 PM (#1606037)
What would Kotchman cost and would he even be worth it? Would the Angels part with Kotchman and one of their middle infield prospects for Cameron?
   48. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 11:16 PM (#1606043)
Petit so far:

3 ip, 5 hits, 3 ER, 1 hr, and 6 strikeouts.

Everyone that faces him seems to take a big cut. His delivery doesn't look all that deceptive to me but what do I knw?
   49. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 11:18 PM (#1606045)
Apparently, spelling isn't one of those things that I do know.
   50. cynic Posted: September 08, 2005 at 11:44 PM (#1606111)
I think Kotchman + MI prospect would be excellent. In fact, I would probably think about trading Cameron for Kotchman straight up. However, I'm not sure the Angels are interested in trading him. Maybe if Morales were tearing up AAA instead of AA, but as it stands, Kotchman is going to be their 1B/DH in 06, 07, and probably 08.

Erg, that's not a real hot line for Petit.
   51. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 08, 2005 at 11:53 PM (#1606135)
Petit since last update:

2 ip, 1 h, 3 k, 1 bb, 0 er.

Petit has a nice curve. He made some of the hitters look silly with that pitch.
   52. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 08, 2005 at 11:56 PM (#1606142)
Erg, that’s not a real hot line for Petit.

5 ip, 6 hits, 3 ER, 1/9 bb/so. One or two more innings without allowing a run, and that's pretty damn good. Toledo has the best offense in the IL, and they already familiar with Petit. Even his line right now is better than Zumaya's: 2 ip, 4 hits, 6 ER, 5/5 bb/so.

I think Kotchman + MI prospect would be excellent. In fact, I would probably think about trading Cameron for Kotchman straight up.

Indeed. That would be excellent. Who are the teams that need a CF for next year? SF, SD, Angels, D-Backs, Red Sox (if they don't resign Damon), Yankees...that's a lot of teams. Even with Cameron's injury, we should be able to get something good in return.
   53. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:03 AM (#1606159)
Petit strikes out the side in the sixth inning on 13 or 14 pitches. He was able to throw his fastball by hitters with two strikes pretty easily because they were looking for his other pitches. I'm not sure the delivery is the reason he gets by with a 89 MPH fastball.
   54. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:12 AM (#1606194)
Petit retires the side in order on two strikeouts and a weak grounder to short. Basically, he threw fastballs on the corners to get ahead and his offspeed stuff to finish the hitters off. He's nasty tonight.
   55. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:13 AM (#1606198)
I’m not sure the delivery is the reason he gets by with a 89 MPH fastball.

Does he use the same delivery for every pitch? If so that could be the reason. I heard his fastball is pretty tough to pick up.
   56. Old Matt Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:15 AM (#1606206)
Hey, the Mets are already running themselves out of the game!
   57. Keep your hand off my Poohole Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:15 AM (#1606207)
You do not steal on Yadier Molina. You bow to his greatness, and you shake your head when TLR bats him cleanup, but you do not try to steal off the guy. Not many chances come against Carpenter, awful stupid to waste one.
   58. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:15 AM (#1606208)
14 strikeouts in 7 innings? Wow. That's unreal.
   59. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:18 AM (#1606219)
Titan Tom is at it again:

"As a starting pitcher you go through things like this every now and then, but it has happened to me alot. I don't know what I have to do but it seems that I am, in a way, running into alot of bad luck. I might have to start throwing complete games from now on in order to ensure the team wins when I pitch. Loop has done a good job but eventually you have to close out big games."

Way to be a great teammate, Glav.
   60. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:25 AM (#1606242)
First off, why do the Mets suck with runners in scoring position?

Petit retires the order in the eighth but no strikeouts.
   61. Old Matt Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:26 AM (#1606245)
Petit has 14 strikeouts in 8 innings??
   62. cynic Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:33 AM (#1606279)
14K in 8 IP? For a starter? That is downright filthy.
   63. AJMcCringleberry Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:35 AM (#1606284)
Wow, great start by Petit.
   64. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:36 AM (#1606292)
Russlan,

Are you going to post a recap of Petit's game at your site? You should.
   65. Dolph Lungren's Super Friend Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:39 AM (#1606298)
I think the Mets' best chance for a few runs has come and gone
   66. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:41 AM (#1606309)
Petit's done. Obviously, he was on his game tonight. The thing I took from this game is that he's got good secondary pitches. His curveball and changeup are plus pitchs. If he gets ahead of major league hitters he'll get them out. The question that needs to be asked is an 89 MPH fastball with good control good enough to get ahead of hitters?
   67. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:43 AM (#1606316)
Are you going to post a recap of Petit’s game at your site? You should.

I will.
   68. AJMcCringleberry Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:43 AM (#1606318)
Jeez, that's four warning track shots now. I don't think that bodes well.
   69. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:44 AM (#1606321)
The question that needs to be asked is an 89 MPH fastball with good control good enough to get ahead of hitters?

If Pedro can do it with an 84 MPH fastball, I think Petit can do it too. Besides, who on the Mets' starting rotation throws above 90 MPH consistenly?
   70. cynic Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:57 AM (#1606351)
Besides, who on the Mets’ starting rotation throws above 90 MPH consistenly?

Pick your choice of snarky answer:

a) A.J. Burnett.
b) Scott Kazmir.
   71. Sam M. Posted: September 09, 2005 at 12:57 AM (#1606357)
who on the Mets’ starting rotation throws above 90 MPH consistenly?

Is that the right question, though? Wouldn't the staff benefit from having at least one guy with some heat?
   72. AJMcCringleberry Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:04 AM (#1606382)
That was one crappy inning.
   73. Dolph Lungren's Super Friend Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:07 AM (#1606396)
Wright has gotten on base in 25 straight games, just throwing that out there
   74. Sam M. Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:08 AM (#1606402)
Benson got big-time squeezed in that AB.
   75. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:09 AM (#1606406)
Is that the right question, though?

If you are trying to establish the fact that major league starters can be successful without 90 MPH fastballs, yes.

Wouldn’t the staff benefit from having at least one guy with some heat?

Yes it would. That's the main reason why I want us to sign AJ. But considering that Petit is not a candidate for a rotation spot right now or next year, I don't see why this concerns him. Ideally, Yusmeiro would replace Glavine in 2007.

<u>2006</u>
1. Pedro
2. AJ
3. Benson
4. Glavine
5. Seo

<u>2007</u>
1. Pedro
2. AJ
3. Benson
4. Petit
5. Seo/Humber

<u>2008</u>
1. ???
2. Pedro
3. AJ
4. Petit
5. Seo/Humber/Pelfrey
   76. Sam M. Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:12 AM (#1606412)
But considering that Petit is not a candidate for a rotation spot right now or next year, I don’t see why this concerns him.

Geez, I hope that's not right. I would love to see the Mets give him every opportunity in spring training to make the staff. If he shows enough, they have a terrific opportunity to deal pitching.
   77. CrosbyBird Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:15 AM (#1606426)
Huge K for Benson.
   78. Dolph Lungren's Super Friend Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:17 AM (#1606431)
Isn't AJ due to blow out his arm and miss '07? I thought that was why we wanted a four year contract
   79. Sam M. Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:18 AM (#1606433)
Oh, so close . . . At least it saved a run for the moment.
   80. Sam M. Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:20 AM (#1606438)
I hate Gerry Davis. Postage stamp strike zones suck.
   81. Sam M. Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:21 AM (#1606443)
Molina taketh with his arm, and giveth with his bat.
   82. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:24 AM (#1606448)
Matsui makes everything exciting, doesn't he?

Usually, those kinds of breaks go against us. If JC Carpenter wasn't pitching, I'd say the Mets are going to win.
   83. CrosbyBird Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:24 AM (#1606451)
Is Reyes any worse defensively than Rey Ordonez was? Certainly even with comparable offensive numbers (he's not even that bad), he'd be more valuable because of his blazing speed, but he makes plenty of highlight reel plays himself.

Of course, St. Rey never showed even a flash of the power potential that Reyes has. Reyes has one more HR already in less than 1/3rd the ABs.
   84. Rob Base Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:26 AM (#1606459)
Of course, St. Rey never showed even a flash of the power potential that Reyes has.

au contraire, he had 3 jacks in like 30 games with the d-rays!
   85. Dolph Lungren's Super Friend Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:34 AM (#1606484)
Benson, with some luck, has turned in a solid game so far
   86. Spencer Benedict Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:37 AM (#1606492)
I just got home and my wife won't let me watch the game. I think she's losing faith in the 2005 Mets.
   87. CrosbyBird Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:39 AM (#1606495)
Is there any chocolate bar that compares to the Snickers bar? It is simply a magical food.
   88. Spencer Benedict Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:41 AM (#1606503)
Is there any chocolate bar that compares to the Snickers bar? It is simply a magical food.

It wouldn't go well with the Hoegaarden Belgian White Beer I'm drinking right now.
   89. CrosbyBird Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:41 AM (#1606505)
Are you sure?
   90. Rob Base Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:44 AM (#1606512)
Well, Pujols. What are you gonna do.
   91. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:44 AM (#1606513)
You have to cut down the lead runner. Goddammit. Have these arsholes ever played baseball?
   92. Rob Base Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:47 AM (#1606522)
Well, Taguchi. What are you gonna do.
   93. CrosbyBird Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:47 AM (#1606525)
Awesome, Rob.
   94. Rob Base Posted: September 09, 2005 at 01:55 AM (#1606539)
These Cardinals announcers are ####### stupid and keep making things up. So far, they have said that Wright can play 1st, 2nd, or 3rd base and that we've seen Diaz at 1st and Catcher.
   95. Sam M. Posted: September 09, 2005 at 02:06 AM (#1606569)
Well, Wright could play first, I guess. It would be idiotic, but they could.

Diaz at catcher would be entertaining. In a horrific sort of way.
   96. CrosbyBird Posted: September 09, 2005 at 02:09 AM (#1606578)
I still wouldn't trade David Wright straight up for Pujols.
   97. AJMcCringleberry Posted: September 09, 2005 at 02:09 AM (#1606579)
This Albert Pujols kid is pretty good.
   98. Rob Base Posted: September 09, 2005 at 02:10 AM (#1606580)
So, we roll into NY under .500.
   99. Srul Itza Posted: September 09, 2005 at 02:11 AM (#1606584)
I'm sure this has come up before --

How many players have reached 200 HRs in their first 5 seasons?
   100. Sam M. Posted: September 09, 2005 at 02:11 AM (#1606585)
So, we roll into NY under .500.

I'm not sure "roll" is the verb I'd use. "Skulk" is probably more accurate.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
BarrysLazyBoy
for his generous support.

Hot Topics

Cubs (7-16) @ Brewers (18-6), Sunday, April 27, 2014, 2:10pm
(1 - 6:16pm, Feb 09)
Last: frannyzoo

Tigers (12-9) @ Twins (12-11), Sunday, April 27, 2014, 2:10pm
(1 - 8:19pm, May 30)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

Yankees (12-8) @ Red Sox (9-12), Wednesday, April 23, 2014, 7:10pm
(3 - 8:14pm, Apr 23)
Last: simon bedford

Cardinals (7-5) @ Brewers (10-2), Monday, April 14, 2014, 8:10pm
(1 - 7:56pm, Apr 14)
Last: cardsfanboy

Athletics (4-3) @ Twins (3-4), Wednesday, April 9, 2014, 1:10pm
(1 - 4:02pm, Apr 09)
Last: LargeBill

Braves (2-1) @ Nationals (3-0), Friday, April 4, 2014, 1:05pm
(3 - 11:46am, Apr 06)
Last: The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s

Reds (1-3) @ Mets (1-3), Saturday, April 5, 2014, 1:10pm
(1 - 4:02pm, Apr 05)
Last: A Dying Soul

Phillies (1-2) @ Cubs (1-2), Friday, April 4, 2014, 2:20pm
(1 - 4:41pm, Apr 04)
Last: SteveM.

Yankees (85-77) @ RedSox (97-65), Thursday, March 20, 2014, 7:05pm
(1 - 7:15pm, Mar 20)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

RedSox (97-65) @ Yankees (85-77), Tuesday, March 18, 2014, 1:05pm
(2 - 2:19pm, Mar 18)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

Cardinals (97-65) @ RedSox (97-65), Wednesday, October 30, 2013, 7:30pm
(1 - 7:10pm, Dec 27)
Last: tfbg9

Cardinals (97-65) @ RedSox (97-65), Wednesday, October 23, 2013, 7:30pm
(1 - 8:55pm, Oct 23)
Last: Paul D(uda)

Dodgers (92-70) @ Cardinals (97-65), Friday, October 11, 2013, 8:30pm
(1 - 6:03pm, Oct 11)
Last: Gamingboy

Pirates (94-68) @ Cardinals (97-65), Wednesday, October 9, 2013, 8:00pm
(1 - 1:08pm, Oct 09)
Last: tfbg9

Athletics (96-66) @ Tigers (93-69), Monday, October 7, 2013, 1:00pm
(1 - 10:07pm, Oct 07)
Last: Buzzards Bay

Page rendered in 0.4980 seconds
39 querie(s) executed

Page rendered in 0.4980 seconds
39 querie(s) executed