Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > It's Mets...Just Mets

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 13 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. spivey Posted: April 22, 2006 at 03:23 AM (#1981155)
I hope this decreases Mets hijacks.
   2. JMEnglish Posted: April 22, 2006 at 03:46 AM (#1981239)
This is a fantastic website. And its awesome your a Mets fan. I can't belive the way Bannister is pitching right now...I think his arm is about to fall off.

I linked you to my site, www.americanlegends.blogspot.com and I was hoping you might do the same for me.

Otherwise LETS GO METS!

Take care,
Mark
   3. Chris in Wicker Park Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:05 AM (#1981292)
Well, this is a great moment. Let's go Mets.
   4. Sam M. Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:13 AM (#1981314)
I hope this decreases Mets hijacks.

Harrumph. Ultimately, all things are about the Mets, so no discussion turning to the Mets can truly be a "hijack." Can it?

Can it?

Sigh.

We'll try to be better. :-)
   5. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:19 AM (#1981325)
Harrumph. Ultimately, all things are about the Mets, so no discussion turning to the Mets can truly be a "hijack." Can it?

Let's discuss Zambia and see how that's about the Mets, smart guy.
   6. Chris Dial Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:21 AM (#1981329)
You know, Zambia was named after Victor Zambrano's ancestors?
   7. spivey Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:21 AM (#1981333)
David Wright could blow it up simply by pointing his bat at the country's picture on a map.
   8. GGC Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:32 AM (#1981344)
When David Wright does a pushup, he isn’t lifting himself up, he’s pushing the Earth down.
   9. Chris Dial Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:37 AM (#1981349)
Did you guys check Benitez' appearance for the Giants tonight?
   10. Repoz Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:48 AM (#1981385)
Congrats...It's about time this Mets thingee got off the ground!

Met quickie...

When I was about 10-years old, one of my druncles took me to Shea...and after the game he pushed me into a train heading the wrong way and let me fend for myself.

I got lost, I got pissed, and I got hatred for Shea after that (Steinblower saw to my recovery tho).

BTW...me uncle got his soon after that by a bunch of local thugs (he owed moola) when they slide some chunks of hot-ice down the back of his shirt and crushed them with baseball bats.
   11. Sam M. Posted: April 22, 2006 at 05:16 AM (#1981445)
BTW...me uncle got his soon after that by a bunch of local thugs (he owed moola) when they slide some chunks of hot-ice down the back of his shirt and crushed them with baseball bats.

I'd say rough justice, pretty much, for what he did to you. Poor fella.
   12. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq., LLC Posted: April 22, 2006 at 05:18 AM (#1981448)
Hey, Repoz, do you have keys to all the team blogs?

You SHOULD.
   13. VG Posted: April 22, 2006 at 05:21 AM (#1981450)
I still think it should be Count the Hijacks™.

Good luck with it, CTD.
   14. Honkie Kong Posted: April 22, 2006 at 10:31 AM (#1981590)
congrats Mets on gettting your own blog.

Blog-Warming gift
   15. Spencer Benedict Posted: April 22, 2006 at 11:43 AM (#1981603)
BTW...me uncle got his soon after that by a bunch of local thugs (he owed moola) when they slide some chunks of hot-ice down the back of his shirt and crushed them with baseball bats.


Could you be related to my wife?

I don't know if anyone remembers this little run in August 1983, but I regarded it then as a major turning point for the franchise.

103 1983-07-31 NYM PIT W 7-6 (12 Inn) 38-65 +
104 NYM PIT W 1-0 (12 Inn) 39-65 ++
105 1983-08-02 NYM MON W 5-2 40-65 +++
106 1983-08-03 NYM MON W 2-1 41-65 ++++
107 1983-08-04 NYM MON L 1-2 41-66 -
108 1983-08-05 NYM @CHC W 9-4 42-66 +
109 1983-08-06 NYM @CHC W 4-1 43-66 ++
110 1983-08-07 NYM @CHC W 6-4 (10 Inn) 44-66 +++
111 1983-08-08 NYM @MON W 6-5 (10 Inn) 45-66 ++++
112 1983-08-09 NYM @MON L 3-7 45-67 -
113 1983-08-10 NYM @MON L 3-5 45-68 --
114 1983-08-12 NYM CHC W 2-0 46-68 +
115 1983-08-13 NYM CHC W 5-1 47-68 ++
116 1983-08-14 NYM CHC W 5-2 48-68 +++
117 1983-08-15 NYM @PIT L 2-4 48-69 -
118 1983-08-16 NYM @PIT L 1-3 48-70 --
119 1983-08-17 NYM @LAD L 1-4 48-71 ---
120 1983-08-19 NYM @SFG W 7-6 (10 Inn) 49-71 +
121 1983-08-20 NYM @SFG W 7-2 50-71 ++
122 1983-08-21 NYM @SFG W 4-3 51-71 +++
123 1983-08-22 NYM @SDP L 3-4 51-72 -
124 1983-08-23 NYM @SDP W 8-3 52-72 +
   16. Maury Brown Posted: April 22, 2006 at 02:09 PM (#1981646)
One day, all the other clubs will fold, and then we'll never have to talk about anything other than the Mets. Until that time, we'll never have anything else to talk about other than the Mets.

Repoz, pass me whatever your druncle was having.
   17. Darren Posted: April 22, 2006 at 02:18 PM (#1981652)
what's with the title?

Why not Meet the Mets? Or M-E-T-S Mets Mets Mets! Or Baseball, the Wright Way. Or something else equally stupid?

Yay Mets blog. You guys are having a great year and it's a fun team to watch.
   18. Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 02:38 PM (#1981668)
You know, Zambia was named after Victor Zambrano's ancestors?

pwn3d
   19. Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 02:39 PM (#1981671)
This is great, even if the name sucks.
   20. Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 03:16 PM (#1981699)
Hate to say it, but you've got to give Rick Peterson some credit for this. Glavine was absolutely falling apart in 2003, and what he was used to doing wasn't working. For whatever reason - Cedeno and Questech come to mind. But he has reinvented himself, from the guy who was throwing everything low and away, to a guy who mixes pitches and locations very very effectively. You have to think he and Peterson have been working very hard together to right the ship, and it's worked.
   21. Sam M. Posted: April 22, 2006 at 03:30 PM (#1981712)
Hate to say it, but you've got to give Rick Peterson some credit for this.

As Glavine himself does.

That said, it's easy to give him too much credit, too -- just as it's too easy for some folks to blame him for the Jae Seo saga in 2004 and not put enough of the blame on Seo himself for not being in shape, etc. I've said plenty of times that Seo has to take a lot of the responsibility for setting his own career back, and the same applies in reverse here: most of the credit has to go to Glavine for turning his own career back around.
   22. Raskolnikov Posted: April 22, 2006 at 03:34 PM (#1981717)
I think that Minaya's first priority should be to get Glavine extended before he hits the FA market in the offseason.
   23. Gaylord Perry the Platypus (oi!) Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:10 PM (#1981747)
Braves fans said “Glad he’s gone.”

Well, most Braves fans who said that were saying that more because of his union leadership than anything else. That, and the belief that he just went for the money.

Myself, I never blamed him for leaving, nor the Braves for letting him leave. Both sides did what they thought was best for them.

Glavine wanted the guarantee of a long term deal. A three year deal looked risky from the team's standpoint, and arguably it was - if he'd signed a one year deal, he would have cost a lot less for the later years of the contract. (I'm sure the Mets aren't complaining, mind you. Just saying he would not have commanded much as a free agent after 2003.) Add in that the Braves wanted to get some younger starters into their staff.

I'm glad he's worked things out and is effective again. I don't want him in the Blyleven limbo when it comes to the Hall of Fame.
   24. Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:17 PM (#1981758)
Hard to imagine he wouldn't hit 300 wins now.
   25. Sam M. Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:18 PM (#1981760)
I never got the feeling Braves' fans had an ounce of regret when Glavine was getting ripped by them every time he faced them, though. They really seemed to relish his struggles. By contrast, it is painful to watch Mike Piazza hit right now, in the current series against the Mets. There's at least part of me that wishes he'd just tear it up, albeit in a losing cause for the Padres.
   26. PreservedFish Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:20 PM (#1981761)
It's probably mostly related to his results, but for the first time I'm beginning to think of Glavine as one of the team. I was dead set against his signing, totally convinced he would be a massive flop, and didn't even understand last year, after two very solid campaigns, why they allowed him to reach the IP trigger for 2006.

But I'm starting to like him.
   27. Gaylord Perry the Platypus (oi!) Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:22 PM (#1981766)
Sam, I'm not saying they weren't glad he left. It was right after the averted strike, when Glavine was the most visible player during negotiations. I think that had more to do with the anger than his performance as a Brave.
   28. Шĥy Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:31 PM (#1981775)
I think there should be some sort of poll by the Mets regulars to decide the name because this one is terrible.
   29. Sam M. Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:32 PM (#1981777)
Sam, I'm not saying they weren't glad he left. It was right after the averted strike, when Glavine was the most visible player during negotiations. I think that had more to do with the anger than his performance as a Brave.

I know, but still -- I would have thought that might have faded some as they got their pound of flesh every time the Braves just killed him. That first year, it was just ugly every time Glavine took the mound against Atlanta. And my sense was Braves' fans loved it more and more every time. At some point, I would have thought they might have winced and said, "Geez, I hate to see that happening to our Tommy, after all those good years . . . . union crap or not."
   30. Chris Dial Posted: April 22, 2006 at 06:00 PM (#1981991)
Hate to say it, but you've got to give Rick Peterson some credit for this. Glavine was absolutely falling apart in 2003, and what he was used to doing wasn't working. For whatever reason - Cedeno and Questech come to mind. But he has reinvented himself, from the guy who was throwing everything low and away, to a guy who mixes pitches and locations very very effectively. You have to think he and Peterson have been working very hard together to right the ship, and it's worked.

In 2003, Glavine was working with Leiter on coming inside more. He started tryig to throw Leiter's cutter, and he couldn't get it for strikes.

Glavine is definitely a smarter pitcher than he once was, but mostly because he doesn't have the pinpoint accuracy he once had. If Glavine could still be as precise as he once was, he'd still only throw the occassional inside pitch.

The grids I link to show how often he misses to the middle fo the plate. That's a sign of age and lack of control.

I don't see any reason to give Peterson any credit beyond any normal pitching coach. Glavine bascally stopped trying to throw a cutter like Leiter - and besides, IIRC, against everyone but the Braves his ERA was in the low threes.

That really says that *NOTHING* was wrong mechanically, but he wasn't changing things up enough when he faced the Braves.
   31. WillieMays Haze Posted: April 22, 2006 at 06:07 PM (#1982021)
This thing is a good idea.

I'm looking all over for a video of Cliff Floyd's collision with Todd Hundley, can anyone help me?
   32. Sam M. Posted: April 22, 2006 at 06:08 PM (#1982032)
Chris, that's the problem with focusing only on location and not on pitch selection. The other thing Glavine has been doing is throwing a curve ball much more often than he ever has in his career, and he has explicitly credited Peterson with urging him to do that, stated that he resisted (perhaps because he was trying the cutter idea instead?), and adopted it reluctantly.

How does Peterson not get at least some credit for getting past a pitcher's resistance to an idea that has helped him keep hitter's off-balance and make his main stuff more effective?

As I said, most of the credit to Glavine for recognizing and implementing the need to adapt. But this stubborn insistence on seeing the bad as being all or virtually all Peterson's fault (Seo '04) and the good as none or virtually none to his credit (Glavine, Heilman) just makes me think you have a pre-set opinion and all outcomes must be explained by reference to that judgment, evidence to the contrary be damned.
   33. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: April 22, 2006 at 06:11 PM (#1982044)
Huzzah! Huzzah!
   34. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: April 22, 2006 at 06:27 PM (#1982081)
For name of the thread, how about "Not Mama, Not Papa, But Metsies, Metsies, Metsies!" (channeling Casey Stengel :-D)
   35. manchestermets Posted: April 22, 2006 at 06:36 PM (#1982098)
Excellent stuff.

I came to BTF to hijack the Dugout, but I may as well ask here instead.

After seeingly being careful to avoid losing draft picks in the 2004/05 off-season, Omar gave them all up last winter.

Now, according to John Sickels the 2006 draft is a very weak crop. Is it giving Omar too much credit to assume that this is related, and there's that much method behind his work?
   36. Jeff K. Posted: April 22, 2006 at 06:44 PM (#1982116)
what's with the title?

My original assumption is that when Szymborski was pestering Dial for a name, Dial said "It's Mets...Just Mets" and Dan decided to get cute. Maybe not.

That said, Dial, remember which blog was first.
   37. Ace the Bat-Hound, not a bumblebee Posted: April 22, 2006 at 07:03 PM (#1982160)
With our pal Zambrano leaving and Trachsel uncertain, there's a good chance we'll need Glavine in next year's rotation, but I'm very happy to wait till the end of the year to determine that. We do have Heilman in the hole, and more importantly, Glavine has been known to pitch like crap for three months at a time.
   38. Gaylord Perry the Platypus (oi!) Posted: April 22, 2006 at 07:10 PM (#1982173)
I've seen suggestions recently that Bobby Cox is not a fan of the curveball. That could be why Glavine resisted throwing it for so long.
   39. good_ol_gil Posted: April 22, 2006 at 07:14 PM (#1982181)
I'm a bit worried since it always seems like he always seems to have good halves of seasons and bad halves. Like the mentioned 2002 example, but also him being great the 1st half of 2004 but mediocre the 2nd half, and even last season: at this time last year everyone wanted to throw Glavine overboard. I think there was even a "Glavine IP to option kicks in" counter on the Metsgeek site with the unanimous opinion being that it would be a disaster if he reached the mark. Some were even calling for a demotion to the bullpen in order to prevent it.

So I just hope he can keep it up.
   40. good_ol_gil Posted: April 22, 2006 at 07:19 PM (#1982197)
Just looking at the splits.

2002:

Pre-AS: 2.27
Post-AS: 3.93

2004:

Pre-AS: 2.66
Post-AS: 5.06

2005:

Pre-AS: 4.94
Post-AS: 2.22
   41. Sam M. Posted: April 22, 2006 at 07:22 PM (#1982209)
It has to be anyone's guess who the heck will join Pedro, Pelfrey, Bannister, and Glavine in the Mets' 2007 rotation. But I think those four guys are pretty good bets, if healthy. My guess is the Mystery Man is not now in the organization.
   42. The Run Fairy Posted: April 22, 2006 at 07:31 PM (#1982223)
Mets suck!!! (Hahaha, the run fairy strikes again)
   43. Srul Itza Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:00 PM (#1982278)
I wrote about his possible demise after the 2003 season.

If that was the first time you wrote about it, you were late to the party. Guys have been writing him off, saying he was doing it with smoke and mirrors, and was just about to crash and burn, since toward the end of the '99 season.

That is one of the reaons I always rooted for him, just to watch him confound expectations. Here's hoping he continues to do so, all the way to #300.
   44. , Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:06 PM (#1982290)
I never got the feeling Braves' fans had an ounce of regret when Glavine was getting ripped by them every time he faced them, though. They really seemed to relish his struggles. By contrast, it is painful to watch Mike Piazza hit right now, in the current series against the Mets. There's at least part of me that wishes he'd just tear it up, albeit in a losing cause for the Padres.

It bothered me. I regretted Glavine leaving - still do. It still seems odd to see him in a Met uniform. And I'm glad he's doing well now.

The comment above about Cox and the curveball is interesting. Maddux has a great curveball. And he hardly ever throws it. I haven't seen him much lately so I don't know if he's been throwing it more now or not, but the Braves' bias against the curve is real, I think, no matter who is the cause.
   45. Joshemy Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:06 PM (#1982292)
I think there was even a "Glavine IP to option kicks in" counter on the Metsgeek site with the unanimous opinion being that it would be a disaster if he reached the mark.

Because, as you point out in #15, he fell apart in the second half of 2004. At the time it seemed, much like Al Leiter in 2004, the first half was not indicative of the pitcher he truly was at that point and the second half was much closer (especially combined with his performance in 2003). His struggles early in 2005 only made that feeling stronger, but then as discussed in this thread, he made many adjustments, including throwing the curveball, that have made him a very good pitcher again. After seeing those adjustments and his performance because of them in the second half, I think most, by the end of the year, were fine with him triggering the option.
   46. , Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:11 PM (#1982299)
23 more wins can be done if he can do two more good seasons. I'm rooting for that, but still won't be surprised if he doesn't make it.
   47. Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:12 PM (#1982304)

I don't see any reason to give Peterson any credit beyond any normal pitching coach.


I don't remember suggesting we build a statue of the guy in the rotunda of New Ebbets. I think there's evidence he's done well coaching Glavine. Full stop.
   48. mike f Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:14 PM (#1982309)
I never got the feeling Braves' fans had an ounce of regret when Glavine was getting ripped by them every time he faced them, though. They really seemed to relish his struggles. By contrast, it is painful to watch Mike Piazza hit right now, in the current series against the Mets. There's at least part of me that wishes he'd just tear it up, albeit in a losing cause for the Padres.

I think being in the same division is the difference here. I'll openly admit that I enjoyed the Braves beating up on Glavine, because it meant that the Mets were losing. I have none of those feelings towards Maddux.
   49. Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:14 PM (#1982315)
With our pal Zambrano leaving and Trachsel uncertain, there's a good chance we'll need Glavine in next year's rotation, but I'm very happy to wait till the end of the year to determine that. We do have Heilman in the hole, and more importantly, Glavine has been known to pitch like crap for three months at a time.

See, I'd rather go after Zito. We should be pretty well positioned to try and land him and Schmidt too. That would be very nice.
   50. , Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:22 PM (#1982332)
What's a Met?
   51. Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:36 PM (#1982352)
Though, I guess once Carlos Lee is inked for 5/65, there won't be enough payroll for both.
   52. Mike Emeigh Posted: April 22, 2006 at 08:56 PM (#1982389)
See, I'd rather go after Zito.


Why in the world would you want Zito? He's basically a league average pitcher who has been fortunate enough to have an outstanding defense behind him - a luxury he probably wouldn't have in New York.

-- MWE
   53. Mike Emeigh Posted: April 22, 2006 at 09:04 PM (#1982395)
Now, according to John Sickels the 2006 draft is a very weak crop. Is it giving Omar too much credit to assume that this is related, and there's that much method behind his work?


It's probably not related.

-- MWE
   54. base ball chick Posted: April 22, 2006 at 10:04 PM (#1982456)
i was a little surprised to read bout the braves fans ripping glavine.

seemed pretty obvious to me that the Organization didn't really want him back and that if the braves and mets had offered him the same deal he would have stayed with the braves.

or maybe it was just that he went to the METS and not the, say, marlins

- but i personally have a weakness for glavine - yeah, it's my little guy thing. and when he come to the Box and i'm up there in the stands i make sure he gets a good loud boo (the respect kind not the jackal kind) when he is introduced.

i sure do hope he makes the hall.

you know that guy has not missed a start in his ENTIRE career?

NOT

ONE

FREAKING

START

so much for you have to be large and strong to be any good.

i think wandy rodriguez has a VERY similar motion and i hope he turns into another glavine
   55. Free Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 10:06 PM (#1982458)
Cool -- a Mets blog.
   56. Free Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 10:12 PM (#1982462)
I just thought it was funny to see the NL league leaders in ERA the other day as No. 1 Maddux and No. 2 Glavine. The more things change . . . I have almost Pedro-like confidence in him right now. He really schooled the Brewers.
   57. Sam M. Posted: April 22, 2006 at 10:16 PM (#1982465)
I'll openly admit that I enjoyed the Braves beating up on Glavine, because it meant that the Mets were losing.

Yeah, but Mike -- you could have rooted for the Braves to win 3-1, with Glavine pitching well and getting a ND, or taking a hard-luck loss. I got the feeling a lot of Braves' fans were cheering not only for the Braves to win, but also -- separate and apart from that -- for Glavine to get slammed all the way back to his hockey days.

you know that guy has not missed a start in his ENTIRE career?

No longer true. He's missed some starts since joining the Mets.
   58. BreakOut Posted: April 22, 2006 at 10:27 PM (#1982474)
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/box-scores/boxscore.php?boxid=198308230SDN

Box score from 1983 turnaround....
   59. Spencer Benedict Posted: April 22, 2006 at 10:42 PM (#1982487)
I remember listening to this one on the radio in the 1971 Pontiac Catalina.
   60. Free Rob Base Posted: April 22, 2006 at 10:48 PM (#1982491)
I caught a classic game on SNY the other night. When the Mets clinched in 1986. I hope they show more of these. It was awesome.
   61. mike f Posted: April 23, 2006 at 12:15 AM (#1982638)
Yeah, but Mike -- you could have rooted for the Braves to win 3-1, with Glavine pitching well and getting a ND, or taking a hard-luck loss.

This is true, but unless good Hudson or Smoltz was on the mound, this wasn't going to happen. It wasn't worth the time hoping Russ Ortiz would throw one-run ball.
   62. Chris Dial Posted: April 23, 2006 at 12:17 AM (#1982640)
How does Peterson not get at least some credit

Oh, I think he deserves *some*, but it's not anything like his rep, and his salary.
   63. Rob Base Posted: April 23, 2006 at 12:23 AM (#1982654)

Oh, I think he deserves *some*, but it's not anything like his rep, and his salary.


He should get his salary halved because of thar stupid hair.
   64. Chris Dial Posted: April 23, 2006 at 12:25 AM (#1982660)
Thansk for the well-wishes.

Also, if you have something you'd like to see discussed, drop John Murphy or me a line. John also has publisher writes, whether he knows it or not.
   65. dlf Posted: April 23, 2006 at 01:06 AM (#1982745)
Sam - I've been to two (I think) Glavine starts at the Ted since his departure. There certainly have been a large number of fans booing him and taking job in his struggles. There have also, however, been a substantial number of folks who have roundly applauded him for what he meant to run beginning in 1991. I count myself among the later as I suspect are most of the folks who come to boards like this. Great, great pitcher who was always a pleasure to watch and carried himself with dignity. The departure was rather sordid, but that doesn't take away what he did.
   66. Xander Posted: April 23, 2006 at 05:16 AM (#1983311)
Question: Is Keith Hernandez always so annoying? I seem to have recollections of him being marginally tolerable in the booth. Admittedly, I prefer Seaver, but Hernandez was an OK #2 option. But between his out and out misogynism and ra-ra cheering tonight, I needed to mute the audio.
   67. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: April 23, 2006 at 06:57 AM (#1983354)
es, the corporate name of the franchise holder is Metropoltan Baseball Club,

I doubt it. :-)
   68. Rob Base Posted: April 23, 2006 at 11:25 AM (#1983382)
Question: Is Keith Hernandez always so annoying? I seem to have recollections of him being marginally tolerable in the booth. Admittedly, I prefer Seaver, but Hernandez was an OK #2 option. But between his out and out misogynism and ra-ra cheering tonight, I needed to mute the audio.

hater.
   69. Raskolnikov Posted: April 23, 2006 at 02:36 PM (#1983450)
As someone who has done a complete 180 on Glavine, I would favor extending him before he hits the market. I believe that at the present, he is more reliable than Zito or Schmidt - both of whom have kinks to work out. Glavine also wouldn't be expecting the 4+ year commitments that I think both Zito and Schmidt would want.

I think that negotiations are much easier when the player is still under contract than when you have to compete with other franchises for the player. Finally, Glavine has established himself as a Met - all things being equal, I like continuity in rooting for my team.
   70. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: April 24, 2006 at 03:16 PM (#1985212)
It's funny that Dial remembers being a Met fan as putting up with a lot of losing seasons. When I moved to NY in 1988 they were the kings of the town. Yankees were definitely second fiddle. Anyway congrats to all Met fans on the blog. Now where's the A's blog?
   71. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: April 24, 2006 at 06:00 PM (#1985543)
John also has publisher writes, whether he knows it or not

No, I did not know that, Chris. Thanks!
   72. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: April 24, 2006 at 07:43 PM (#1985759)
The name of this blog should be "7 Train."
   73. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: April 24, 2006 at 07:43 PM (#1985761)
wait, nevermind, that was a friend of mine's blog.
   74. Roadblock Jones Posted: April 24, 2006 at 08:09 PM (#1985819)
Terrific.

I caught a classic game on SNY the other night. When the Mets clinched in 1986. I hope they show more of these. It was awesome.

I'd much rather they showed random crappy Met games from the 70s. Those are the Mets I grew up with.
   75. Free Rob Base Posted: April 24, 2006 at 08:38 PM (#1985897)
The majesty of the Doug Flynn/Frank Taveras double play combo.

Those teams were good for only one thing -- making my appreciation for the 80's teams that were actually good all the more sweet.
   76. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: April 24, 2006 at 08:46 PM (#1985919)
Those teams were good for only one thing -- making my appreciation for the 80's teams that were actually good all the more sweet.

Ain't that the truth!
   77. Sam M. Posted: April 24, 2006 at 09:56 PM (#1986067)
I'd much rather they showed random crappy Met games from the 70s. Those are the Mets I grew up with.

You are a truly, truly sick individual. Blech.

Especially post-June 15, 1977. Doug Flynn could only be on the Mets after that date, and those games are torture for that reason alone.
   78. Rob Base Posted: April 24, 2006 at 10:07 PM (#1986088)
glad i didn't become Mets-aware until 86.
   79. Roadblock Jones Posted: April 24, 2006 at 11:42 PM (#1986222)
I'm semi-serious about this. While it's nice to be able to see some of the important games again, I'd enjoy another series where they showed games that the audience wouldn't necessarily know the result of first if at all possible. Just random old games.

They have 21 hours a day to kill on that channel, they may as well.
   80. Free Rob Base Posted: April 25, 2006 at 01:30 PM (#1987458)
I'm semi-serious about this. While it's nice to be able to see some of the important games again, I'd enjoy another series where they showed games that the audience wouldn't necessarily know the result of first if at all possible. Just random old games.

I would probably watch these too. When I was kid a traded a Reggie Jackson baseball card for a Steve Henderson and thought it was a great deal. I am also curious to see if John Stearns is as good as I remember --he was a perennial all-star.
   81. Free Rob Base Posted: April 25, 2006 at 01:37 PM (#1987466)
I noted last night that this Mets team has been very streaky under Randolph. It seems like they are either on fire or ice cold. I wonder if there is any reason for that or something to be learned.
   82. Zeba Zeba Eata Posted: April 25, 2006 at 01:43 PM (#1987472)
I think one reason is that they have had a crap bench the whole time, so when injuries occur, they tend to go in the tank (due both to the presence of a not-so-talented hitter/fielder in the lineup/field, and the rest of the team pressing to make up for it).
   83. Free Rob Base Posted: April 25, 2006 at 01:49 PM (#1987476)
The Tides only managed five hits and Lastings Milledge continues to play like he is in a different universe in terms of talent and picked up two of them on a 2 for 4 day in which he stole two bases.

This is from the Mets Geek. I don't understand the Milledge situation at all. Its costing us games not having him in the majors.
   84. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: April 25, 2006 at 01:50 PM (#1987481)
I think having Milledge in hte minors *is* costing us games.
   85. Roadblock Jones Posted: April 25, 2006 at 02:44 PM (#1987541)
I'd kill to see Jon Matlack pitch.

Plus "Met Classics" is something the Yes network would do. For SNY I propose a miniseries instead called "Yankee Classics" where they show only the subway series games where the Yankees lose.
   86. Roadblock Jones Posted: April 25, 2006 at 03:53 PM (#1987692)
I'm as anxious to see Millege as the next guy (maybe more) but to be fair to to him, I'd feel better delaying his call-up till he has 150 ABs or so down there, and certainly wouldn't excuse rushing him by suggesting he'd be some kind of miracle cure (even if he is).

One of the things you could argue about our current struggles is that Reyes can't help himself as a result of not having had enough time to learn to do so in the minors. You'll recall he was supposed to be a short-term injury replacement when called up in 03.
   87. Roadblock Jones Posted: April 25, 2006 at 03:59 PM (#1987706)
By the way, I agree with the LoDuca assessment. His slump is killing us as much as Beltran's absense and Reyes' slump.

And worse than failing to throw out any baserunners, his work around the plate on balls in the dirt hasn't looked especially sharp. In fact were it not for his good salesmanship on the throw he dropped on opening day, his game beyond pitchcalling has been a real disappointment.
   88. DCA Posted: April 25, 2006 at 04:04 PM (#1987718)
you know that guy has not missed a start in his ENTIRE career?

The same is true of Zito. Health has a bunch of value.

Why in the world would you want Zito? He's basically a league average pitcher who has been fortunate enough to have an outstanding defense behind him - a luxury he probably wouldn't have in New York.

Zito's better than a league average pitcher. Much better, even if you focus only on rate stats and not durability. How much defense does it take to turn to turn a league average pitcher into a 130 ERA+ pitcher? Plus, Peterson knows him, and he pitched very well back then.
   89. Bob Koo Posted: April 25, 2006 at 04:55 PM (#1987828)
It's amazing that this team is 12-7 with all the at-bats given to hopeless performers like Hernandez, Chavez, and Valentin. And currently, Reyes.
   90. Rob Base Posted: April 25, 2006 at 05:11 PM (#1987858)
The team racked up most of those wins without Chavez and Valentin in the lineup, and while Reyes was hitting the snot out of the ball. So, it's not so amazing. The team is 2-5 over the last 7 games.
   91. J M Posted: April 25, 2006 at 05:40 PM (#1987921)
Hey Dial...great to see you doing this. Gonna be an automatic daily stop for me.

Here's the big question- was Reyes actually helped by Rickey (a la Cedeño99) and now regressed as the lessons have gone out the window? Or was his hot start just that, making for a big ol' coincidence. I suppose we'll have some more evidence in June...
   92. Free Rob Base Posted: April 25, 2006 at 07:24 PM (#1988139)
One of the things you could argue about our current struggles is that Reyes can't help himself as a result of not having had enough time to learn to do so in the minors. You'll recall he was supposed to be a short-term injury replacement when called up in 03.

I doubt the 150 extra plate appearances you suggest Millege needs would matter much -- to Reyes or Milledge. Bring Milledge up. You can always send him back down.
   93. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: April 25, 2006 at 07:31 PM (#1988154)
Well, think of that...our own BTF blog!

You are a real boy, Pinnocchio...
   94. Шĥy Posted: April 25, 2006 at 07:32 PM (#1988156)
There's really no reason to start Lo Duca over Castro at this point. Castro is probably better offensively and defensively it is not even close. I think Castro even has him beat in the "heart and soul" category which is supposed to be Lo Duca's specialty.
   95. Benji Posted: April 25, 2006 at 07:33 PM (#1988157)
I know I'll get blasted for this, but this mini slump has me paraphrasing a '70's 49er fan banner:

The Mets are slumping (The Niners are losing)
The fans are blue
Matsui and Zambrano {Plunkett and Mike-Mayer}
It's bcause of you
   96. MM1f Posted: April 25, 2006 at 08:07 PM (#1988243)
Awesome, my one stop shop for misery come October
   97. Roadblock Jones Posted: April 25, 2006 at 08:31 PM (#1988293)
Wasn't saying Milledge needed 150 "extra" ABs, just 150 ABs overall in AAA before one can be sure he's capable of being the difference between winning and losing games, as suggested above.

Agreed that the difference between Castro and LoDuca is mainly of brand, not skill.
   98. Sam M. Posted: April 27, 2006 at 01:41 AM (#1991903)
I posted this at the very end of today's game chatter, but just FYI . . . Jim Caple said today in a chat in Baseball America that not only would he prefer Mike Pelfrey to Victor Zambrano in the Mets' rotation in August. He'd prefer Pelfrey right now.

I'm not sure if that says more positive about Pelfrey, or more negative about Zambrano.
   99. Rob Base Posted: April 27, 2006 at 01:52 AM (#1991953)
I keep saying this and it keeps getting ignored:

1) Pelfrey is on an 85 pitch count. Just as he should be. A major league starter's workload would turn him into Bill Pulsipher before you can say "Paul Wilson."

2) It was pretty apparent to me in spring that all pelfrey has really working right now is a fastball. It's a major-league caliber fastball that he can locate, but he doesn't have a strong out pitch - a splitter, a curve, whatever. I think he'd be hit pretty hard, if not right away, then certainly the second time through the league.

I'm high on Pelfrey, and as low as anybody on Z, but it's the wrong answer for the 2006 Mets.
   100. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: April 27, 2006 at 01:57 AM (#1991971)
John Maine had a pretty good start in AAA. He went 7 innings and allowed 1 run. He struck out 9, walked one, and allowed a homer. He's posted a 2.63 ERA in 24 innings with a 18/5 k/bb ratio.
Page 1 of 13 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
aleskel
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.5573 seconds
57 querie(s) executed