Should we be talking about a Big Sexy reunion?

[Ceetar]

41Forever wrote: And her statement about Tebow is insulting to him. He's not there for entertainment.

he's there to promote his own brand and image.

also, they're all there for entertainment. That's what baseball is.

[Centerfield]

Let's look at the rotation.

1. deGrom: Was healthy last year. But had elbow surgery in 2016. We need him to be a horse, because in this group, he is considered "reliable".

2. Syndergaard: Coming off of major injury where he missed the majority of the season. He is also in our "reliable" group.

3. Matz: Was hurt all last year. Coming off elbow surgery. History of injuries.

4. Harvey: Complete unknown. Still recovering from TOS surgery with no idea what his end result will be.

5. Wheeler: Has not been healthy since 2014. And wasn't good when healthy.

6. Lugo: Partially torn UCL that will not heal itself.

7. Gsellman: sucked.

But yes, let's pretend that all of our injury issues are behind us. I would love to see the basis on why you think we will be relatively healthy this year.

[Ceetar]

all our injury issues ARE behind us. Everyone finished the season active or at least recovering right? That's ahead of the game with a rotation these days. I'm sure we'll lose at least one before Opening Day, just by odds.

there are also injury issues in front of us.

they may or may not be related.

there isn't a guy out there that doesn't come with that risk either.

Mickey has already discussed possibly putting one of those starters in the bullpen.

If you sign another guy, you do have to deal with the idea of putting some of those guys in the minors. Maybe one of Wheeler, Matz, Harvey. I haven't looked at what options they have, but demoting guys like that isn't a decision you make likely, all merit based arguments aside.

[Centerfield]

Ceetar wrote: Everyone finished the season active or at least recovering right?.

That is literally everyone in baseball except Jennry Mejia.

Even David Wright is "recovering".

[Ceetar]

Centerfield wrote: Ceetar wrote: Everyone finished the season active or at least recovering right?. That is literally everyone in baseball except Jennry Mejia. Even David Wright is "recovering".

no it's not.

guys have surgery in the offseason.

Michael Conforto's timeline is April-May and he hasn't yet done baseball stuff. I think all the pitchers are either healthy or they had minor procedures that they've recovered from, it's just the offseason so they don't pitch. We're not waiting on status updates from any of them.

[Centerfield]

Michael Conforto had surgery in early September. By season's end, he was "recovering".

So were Matz and Wheeler, who were shut down.

Syndergaard was "active", in that he was good for one inning a week, and Harvey was throwing but terrible.

Lugo's UCL tear is not behind us.

And Gsellman's hamstring is presumably healed but he's still suffering from hesucksitis.

[Ceetar]

yes, my point was we're not expecting updates on these guys, we expect them ready to go. They're "fine" Conforto's not, we're still waiting on an update on the success of the surgery and a timeline.

Syndergaard threw with no pain in a major league game. He's no more at risk next year than anyone else.

Lugo is dealing with a UCL tear, as are dozens of active major league pitchers.

Matz had surgery and is expected to be fine and ready to go.

Wheeler had some bumps and bruises that were attributed to not pitching in two years. He was also ineffective, which could be the same thing. That's a concern, but it's an ongoing one.

Harvey is obviously an unknown too, but again, not really injured.

You can rely on deGrom and Syndergaard as much as you can rely on any pitcher. so that's two. a real good two.

I think Matz and Lugo are what they are. You try to manage their injury risk I guess, and see what you can get out of them. they seem the top two candidates for improvement with the new staff.

Harvey had life and movement on his pitches, he just struggled with command. Hopefully this is something a year removed and a new outlook will help. maybe not.

Who knows about Gsellman and Montero. You lean towards "they're bad" but they're better than Adam Wilk level depth at least. Flexen may or may not have some potential.

You could certainly mix in a Lance Lynn type into that mix. but no starter is without his own question marks.

I advocated for signing Darvish though, personally I think risking money on a higher-upside guy is better than getting another mid-rotation guy to this mix.

[Frayed Knot]

As far as I can tell, the basis for this whole "rumor" stems from some off-hand remarks given to the Pioneer Press by Twins hurler Ervin Santana. HE mentioned Colon and the Mets but it's not apparent that either Colon or the Mets have yet to mention each other. * and the Mets now claim to be surprised by the mentioned and deny even thinking about it The value here is that it was sourced, rather than the typical "according to a person close to the Mets" nonsense that we normally get from sportswriters. Sourcing allowed us to see where the information was coming from and make our own judgement as to its accuracy.

Yes it was 'sourced', but that source was nothing more than Colon's buddy saying that he thought Bartolo might like to go back to the Mets.
No Mets sources were involved (or even ones 'close to their thinking') nor was Colon himself.

That doesn't make the article false, it just means that any conclusions drawn from it -- **THE METS ARE MAKING LIKE TIMBERLAKE AND TRYING TO BRING SEXY BACK** -- are like third generation speculation.
And while the Minnesota paper didn't appear to check with the Mets for comment, when Ackert (NYDN) did their response was basically: "Huh, we're doing what now?"

[Centerfield]

As far as I can tell, the basis for this whole "rumor" stems from some off-hand remarks given to the Pioneer Press by Twins hurler Ervin Santana. HE mentioned Colon and the Mets but it's not apparent that either Colon or the Mets have yet to mention each other. * and the Mets now claim to be surprised by the mentioned and deny even thinking about it The value here is that it was sourced, rather than the typical "according to a person close to the Mets" nonsense that we normally get from sportswriters. Sourcing allowed us to see where the information was coming from and make our own judgement as to its accuracy. Yes it was 'sourced', but that source was nothing more than Colon's buddy saying that he thought Bartolo might like to go back to the Mets. No Mets sources were involved (or even ones 'close to their thinking') nor was Colon himself. That doesn't make the article false, it just means that any conclusions drawn from it -- **THE METS ARE MAKING LIKE TIMBERLAKE AND TRYING TO BRING SEXY BACK** -- are like third generation speculation. And while the Minnesota paper didn't appear to check with the Mets for comment, when Ackert (NYDN) did their response was basically: "Huh, we're doing what now?"

That's not what the article said.

Santana did talk last week with former Twins pitcher Bartolo Colon, who turns 45 in May but wants to supplant Dennis Martinez as the winningest pitcher from Latin America. Santana mentioned Colon, whose 240 career victories are five behind Martinez, has drawn interest from the New York Mets about a potential reunion.

According to the Pioneer Press, Santana said that he spoke with Colon, and that Colon has drawn interest from the Mets. Santana could be wrong, or Colon could be lying, but the article suggests that it was more than just Santana speculating that Bartolo would like to return.

[Ceetar]

so either way a completely unsourced second or third hand rumor of 'interest' generated mounds of #content for a lot of people.

This is about as valid as if someone heard Sandy Alderson say "Thanks Neal" on the phone as he hung up on line at Starbucks and when he tells his friend back at the office he reports the Mets talking about Harrison again.

[Centerfield]

Ceetar wrote: so either way a completely unsourced second or third hand rumor of 'interest' generated mounds of #content for a lot of people. This is about as valid as if someone heard Sandy Alderson say "Thanks Neal" on the phone as he hung up on line at Starbucks and when he tells his friend back at the office he reports the Mets talking about Harrison again.

No, it is sourced. It is a second hand, sourced account. The public can decide to give it whatever weight it wishes, but the source of the information is there for all to see.

Ackert's on the other hand, is unsourced. And unlike the Bartolo to Santana account, we have no way of knowing whether it's accurate or if the source has motivations to be untruthful.

Your "Thanks Neal" comment is not anything like what happened here.

[Ceetar]

There's a source for the quote, not a source for the rumor. same as in my example. The source for the quote is the guy on line at Starbucks. The writing infers that there was some other, non quoted, discussion about who he'd been talking to. But Santana is not a reporter. This is burying a rumor in layers to obscure that it actually has no factual backing. Santana said that Bartolo said 'Mets are interested' is not actually a source.

Literally I know a guy who knows a guy who's said that the Mets are interested. Would that fly anywhere else?

[Guest 41Forever]

Having a source identified is way, way better than a sportswriter doing the "someone who is familiar with the Mets' thinking" anonymous source thing -- which happens all the time.

Santana saying that this is something his friend told him. That's legit. He may be wrong, and Bartolo might be wrong. But it's different than an overheard conversation -- and worthy of discussion.

[Ceetar]

41Forever wrote: Having a source identified is way, way better than a sportswriter doing the "someone who is familiar with the Mets' thinking" anonymous source thing -- which happens all the time. Santana saying that this is something his friend told him. That's legit. He may be wrong, and Bartolo might be wrong. But it's different than an overheard conversation -- and worthy of discussion.

gimme the first any time. if it's from someone I trust, at least I know their reputation. they're probably not making it up. crazy random speculation from random players/people is worthless.

[Zvon]

Having a source identified is way, way better than a sportswriter doing the "someone who is familiar with the Mets' thinking" anonymous source thing -- which happens all the time. Santana saying that this is something his friend told him. That's legit. He may be wrong, and Bartolo might be wrong. But it's different than an overheard conversation -- and worthy of discussion. gimme the first any time. if it's from someone I trust, at least I know their reputation. they're probably not making it up. crazy random speculation from random players/people is worthless.

Both are a crock of shit.

In the case of the first: I don't like it. I want to know the source. I'll make up my own mind as to if the source is reliable or not. I'm sick of writers hiding their sources behind "someone who is familiar with the Mets". How much vaguer can you get! I'm familiar with the Mets. I'd be a HORRIBLE source! Well, a little better from reading youz guyz. But I skew half of what I read.

In the case of the second: I don't like it. That's hearsay. Before you write it give the Mets a call. Or ring up Colon. Odds are good a phone is right in your freakin' pocket. If you have to dig thru connections to get the number you need, do it. If you have no connections, get some or find a new profession. Reaching the Mets tho, should be no problem. Just take the time to do it, and do it.

Many writers are in a rush to beat the other to the punch. If you wanna score a knockout, don't be taking quick unfounded jabs.

[Edgy MD]

Sheesh, let's start a journalism sourcing sub-forum.

[nymr83]

I feel like we have been over this a million times.

Some journalists can be sloppy about sources. That percentage is, in my opinion, much higher amongst sports writers.

When you are blowing the whistle on the polluting factory or the criminal activity of a politician, I will accept there may be some legitimate need for protection.

When you are reporting that the Mets might be interested in signing a player, I consider it purely unsubstatiated rumor unless a source is named with a high likelihood of being totally false.

Doesnt mean it wont sell advertising or make for interesting off-season conversation at the CPF. But the opinions of everyone here are likely just as valid as the "source" and are even generally more interesting.

[Edgy MD]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I partially agree. Colon is not the answer to the Mets rotation problems, but thinking things are "just fine" is way too optimistic. With luck, it could turn out that way, but importing another pitching option would help the odds.

I'm not sure anything is ever just fine. Good pitching is ephemeral. All rotations are held together by spit and duct tape You try and build up redundancies, but there's only so much that can be effected by signing veterans. Sometimes you are just burying developing talent underneath somebody else's broken pitcher. The window to break through is short, so you've got to show some faith or lose your guy.

But yeah, I'm all for pursuing Darvish.

[Centerfield]

All my Sexy's live in Texas.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/22322489/rangers-sign-44-year-old-bartolo-colon-minor-league-deal

[MFS62]

Centerfield wrote: All my Sexy's live in Texas. http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/22322489/rangers-sign-44-year-old-bartolo-colon-minor-league-deal

As noted in the "Wrong Trousers" thread.
But I guess anyone as big and sexy as Big Sexy deserves it to be said twice.
Later

Edited February 5, 2018 by Guest

[Centerfield]

Oops. Sorry. Big trousers.

[G-Fafif]

Reading the subject line and contemplating what one who is unfamiliar with the nickname would make of a "Big Sexy reunion".

[Edgy MD]

Reunited and it feels so GOOD!

[nymr83]

Bartolo took a line drive to the stomach...

I love this guy

Big Sexy wrote: The important thing is we won the game and I was able to get the out, He got me on the side. It was not in the middle. And I have a big belly, so I can [handle] it.