Zambrano: What's Wrong & What Happens Next

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

metsmarathon wrote: if its a waste of time, then why do we care wether we think they're telling the truth, lying, spinning, or later changing their minds?

Excellent question. But if the answer is, "I guess we don't or shouldn't anyway" then we're reduced to analyzing what happens on the field, and why we think it happens, and stuff like that. That reduces us to sabremetric- type dweebs, and that's like a fate worse than death, innit?

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

Edgy DC wrote: What was the compensation he got for Art Howe again?

Nothing from us. Beane was free to sign Macha as manager for much less than Howe would have gotten.

[Theoldmole]

It's the job of a sports franchise to work at the best strategies for winning, not to disclose all their strategies to the media.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Hell of a job the Mets have been doing the last five years, Mole, just a hell of a.

So why do we pay attention to the stuff they're not even trying to do? "Hello, we're talking to Omar Minaya, who's under no obligiation to share his genuine thoughts wth us today--in fact, it probably suits Omar's goals better to deceive us and to tell us stuff that will mislead or confuse us, in hopes of getting disinformation out in public, and you listeners are intended to be used as conduits of Omar's disinformation. Omar, hi. Are you intending to take Helmlan out of the bullpen and make a starter of him?"

[Elster88]

You can't see it, but I'm shaking my head in astonishment.

[Guest KC]

BS: Are you intending to take Helmlan out of the bullpen and make a starter of him?"

O: We'll have to see how that all pans out.

or

O: Frankly Gammo, we're panic struck right now and don't know
what to do. The in-fighting over whether Zambie should ever have been acquired,
everyone wanting Miledge or Wright in a deal, the internet constantly second guessing
the manager -- I'm getting hives, but I feel I need full discloure. I went through a
tube of Preparation H last week and one of my children has ADS too. Oh, and Jeff
drinks like a fish.

[Centerfield]

="Bret Sabermetric"] So why do we pay attention to the stuff they're not even trying to do? "Hello, we're talking to Omar Minaya, who's under no obligiation to share his genuine thoughts wth us today--in fact, it probably suits Omar's goals better to deceive us and to tell us stuff that will mislead or confuse us, in hopes of getting disinformation out in public, and you listeners are intended to be used as conduits of Omar's disinformation. Omar, hi. Are you intending to take Helmlan out of the bullpen and make a starter of him?"

I realize Bret's quote here is tongue in cheek, but how far is it from the truth? In situations such as trades or free agency, it is in the best interest of the organization to talk as if they have other options, to appear to be leaning in another direction, anything to improve their leverage, or at least, their perceived leverage.

So then, why do we bother listening? If I had to guess, I would say we listen because we all think we can read between the lines. We all listen with the hopes that we can judge from Omar's tone "what he is really thinking". You know, because fans like us know Omar so well we can read his inflections or body language. The great part about this is that no matter what our position, anything Omar says always corroborates our ideas.

Omar: "No way in hell we are trading Milledge."

Apologists: "Hooray! Did you hear that? Lastings is safe!"

Cynics: "That's what they said about Kazmir. Milledge is as good as gone."

[Elster88]

]The great part about this is that no matter what our position, anything Omar says always corroborates our ideas.

Which is why arguing over a quote is so stupid.

[Guest KC]

Cf:>>>Omar: "No way in hell we are trading Milledge."<<<

heyman: They're shopping Wright for a starter.

[Elster88]

LOLOL

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

My quarrell (at 1:16 P.M. today, through about 1:20) is with those who persist in using quotes to support the Mets' thinking. "Omar said it, therefore it's so: the Mets are/aren't looking for another reliever, trading Wright for the entire Marlins franchise, bringing Milledge up anytime this decade, etc."

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I'm not going to reread every post ever made, but I don't think there's a lot of that happening.

We do have a lot of "Omar said it" but not a lot of "therefore it's so."

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

OK, I'm done.

Yancy says no one puts any credence in what Omar says, ever, that's good enough for me. Next?

[Theoldmole]

Is there possibly a point in between "therefore it's so" and "no credence"?

[Theoldmole]

It's like that country and western song -- there's got to be something between lust and watching TV.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I said "not a lot of." I said nothing about "never."

There's simply no end to your distortions, is there?

[Theoldmole]

In case anyone's wondering, here's the lyric -- by Cal Smith:


The life that I�m seeking is not in this bar where I�m sitting

But it�s sure ain�t at home where the one that I�m married to�s knitting

Happiness may not be here drinking beer, feeling it go to my head

But it ain�t back at home where she�s putting in curlers and rollers and dressing for bed



What I�m looking for ain�t the blonde in the corner who�s winking

But it sure ain�t my wife who devoted her life to dumb thinking

Happiness surely still lives in this world and somewhere it�s waiting for me

And I�m know that it must be somewhere between lust and sitting home watching TV



Somewhere between Playboy magazine and next Tuesday night�s PTA

Somewhere between a honky-tonk queen and what all the dog did today

If a wife and a lover could be one of the same what a beautiful world this would be

And there would be us somewhere between lust and sitting home watching TV



My wife�s a good cook but a man can�t exist on just bread

And what I�m hungry for is the one thing I ain�t being fed

I haven�t been shopping but there�s lot of bargains walking through town tempting me

And a body could rust on a diet of lust and sitting home watching TV



Somewhere between Playboy magazine and next Tuesday night�s PTA

Somewhere between a honky-tonk queen and what all the dog did today

If a wife and a lover could be one of the same what a beautiful world this would be

And there would be us somewhere between lust and sitting home watching TV

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

My point was, either you have some or you have none. If you have some, and I think you're granting that you do, then that's too much, if he could always be dissembling, and you can't tell when he is and when he isn't. You want to allow, ,maybe, that's he always lying, but sometimes you think it's worthwhile to parse the signals emerging from his mouth anyway? Why just at those times, then?

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Well, I can only push this point so far.

I'll say that I never say, "If Omar said it it's true." It's possible that others here have said that. And if you find anyone who did, I'll leave it to that person, whoever it is, to defend that point.

[Elster88]

I don't know that there are many times where someone has said "If Omar said it, it must be true" or something along those lines. It's a lot easier to call people "kool-aid drinkers" without using actual words that they posted.

[Theoldmole]

]My point was, either you have some or you have none. If you have some, and I think you're granting that you do, then that's too much, if he could always be dissembling, and you can't tell when he is and when he isn't. You want to allow, ,maybe, that's he always lying, but sometimes you think it's worthwhile to parse the signals emerging from his mouth anyway? Why just at those times, then?

Who is this not true of? Do any of us know some people who always tell the truth, and some who always lie? I mean, besides ones who are guarding two doors, one of which leads to certain death?

You listen to Omar, or read accounts of his statements to the press, because he's the general manager of the Mets, and you like to read about the Mets. You hope, that when Omar says "We're not talking to anyone just now," that he actually has something up his sleeve, and you hope that you'll like it. You'd probably not have much respect for him as a GM if he kept saying things like "We don't want other GMs to know this, because it would give them too much leverage, but we've detected a serious flaw in Pelfrey's delivery, and we're planning to unload him to the first team that's sap enough to give us a couple of retreads and a lower minor leaguer for him."

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

I'm saying, Mole, that people select moments to believe Omar (or any GM) based more on what they WANT to believe than on any more objective standard of logic or credibility. Turning your True/False switch on and off based on what you like to hear seems pretty unreliable to me. He could announce this afternoon, "I'm working out a deal that will bring seven All-Stars to the Mets in exchange for 2016 draft picks" and some Mets fans will get all excited: "Maybe it's true? Goody. That would be great. I wonder who Omar's planning to get..."

[Theoldmole]

Yeah, but this is not startingly different from how we react to any other public figure. That's why Republicans tend to believe Bush more than Democrats do.

[Willets Point]

Since we were reminiscing about Avi in another thread, I thought I'd point out that at least four pages ago Avi would have said "Whatever, dude."

[Elster88]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: I'm saying, Mole, that people select moments to believe Omar (or any GM) based more on what they WANT to believe than on any more objective standard of logic or credibility.

This is true of both apologists and cynics.

[metsmarathon]

and so, sal, what do you resolve that we as met fans should do? completly ignore anything that ever comes from omar's mouth? treat it all as gospel? or treat it all as the exact opposite of the truth?

i mean, surely, it must be one of these options, no?

and if we simply ignore everything the organization says, then don't we just become dweebs?

if we treat it all as gospel, aren't we just kidding ourselves?

and is we treat it all as the opposite of gospel, aren't we doing teh exact same thing?

or do we just go on, continue to act like humans do, and accept certain things as more likely to be true, and other things to be more likely to be false, based on our own predispositions and experiences?

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Hmmm. Shades of grey. Interesting concept.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

metsmarathon wrote: and so, sal, what do you resolve that we as met fans should do?

I would "accept certain things as more likely to be true, and other things to be more likely to be false, " but I would drectly question why those beliefs applyb, and not just base them "on our own predispositions and experiences," otherwise known as biases and prejudices.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

I think I know what you're saying, but have to add there ought be absolutely zero shame in getting a fan to "admit" they, for example, interpret something about the team they support from the perspective that they want them to be right, or hope it's accurate, or whatever. That's pretty much the definition of a fan.

That doesn't mean they can't disagree, or be cynical, or think Omar's blowing smoke, or are unwitting swallowers of whatever information comes down the pike.

For example, I admit I wear blue-and-orange jammies with the worst of them, but still thought the team bungled the whole value equation with Mike Cameron. But I sure hope Omar turns out to be right, and you bet yer ass I'll cheer for the success of that deal. That's what a fan does. There's no shame in that. None at all.

[metsmarathon]

="Bret Sabermetric"] ="metsmarathon"]and so, sal, what do you resolve that we as met fans should do? I would "accept certain things as more likely to be true, and other things to be more likely to be false, " but I would drectly question why those beliefs applyb, and not just base them "on our own predispositions and experiences," otherwise known as biases and prejudices.

just so long as we're all aware that we all have biases and prejudices.