Zambrano: What's Wrong & What Happens Next

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

If it's spin. It may also be the truth, which would be opposite of the spin. You know exactly the same amount of the Mets' thinking before hearing their spin as you do after. I don't get why you even factor it in. It's completely without value.

[seawolf17]

Then why even talk about it? Let's just close up shop, shut down the Pool, and go be monks.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

]It's completely without value.

It seems to make a pretty good prop for your broadsides.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I guess we have a different perspective. I think it has a limited amout of value.

Take two potential "leaks" from the Mets front office:

"Milledge is our future. No way we're trading him."

"Milledge is a talented young player, but we're looking to win it all this year. If we can trade him for a quality major leaguer, we're going to do it."

If they make the second statement, I'm going to think that he's likely gone.

I guess I could put it this way: I see it less as a lie or spin as an indication of their current thinking, which is subject to change. If it does change, you would say that they were lying all along. I'm not sure that's necessarily the case. I like that they seem to be thinking this way.

[nymr83]

]Completely don't get why you would ascribe an iota of credibility more to the Mets organization than you would to a newspaper columnist.

which of these two needs to fill up a quota of bullshit everyday and which need not say anything at all? right.
i have no reason to believe the mets were liars, and even if they were it would serve a purpose- if yopu anounce to the world that you are going after Willis then the price for Willis just skyrocketed, but hey thats probably what Bret wants because then he can complain that the Mets overpaid for Willis as evidenced by his ridiculous Zito-trade above.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Johnny Dickshot wrote: ]It's completely without value. It seems to make a pretty good prop for your broadsides.

Well, I resent the hell out of their wasting my time and I resent their pious attitude of scrupulous honesty in purveyng the bullshit with straight faces and I resent the way they reel you guys in. Against my better judgment I sometimes feel obliged to remind you of their track record in telling the truth in public, and I resent that additional waste of my energy as well.

They do occasionally tell the truth, by accident. That is, sometimes the bullshit they're spinning will work out the way they're spinning it, which may give them the ability to claim not to be 100% full of bullshit. The whole Peterson/Zambrano "ten minutes" episode is an example of this spinmeistering. He said it, he didn't deny it, then after 10 minutes had passd, word got out that he never said it, and then after 10 weeks had passed, people started saying "It's an old joke, stop saying it already" and now after 10 months have passed, the meme is "Did he even say it?" But you can bet your bottom hemorrhoid that if he HAD straightened Zambrano out (I think he would have needed Dr. Freud and nine years in Vienna) in ten minutes, the banner would have been hung on the fence in Shea: "410--Peterson fixed Zambrano in 10 Minutes!"

[Elster88]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: As I've said before, I don't care if they spin. I don't care if they lie. If denying an impending deal makes it, or a different deal, more likely to happen, then more power to them. The Mets don't owe me anything at all. There are hundreds of organizations and companies that get more of my money than the Mets do. Paying attention to the Mets is an entertainment. A diversion. I'm not going to get outraged about what they say, who they trade, or who they put at any one position. I'm not 12 years old anymore.

Well said.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Nymr83 wrote: ]Completely don't get why you would ascribe an iota of credibility more to the Mets organization than you would to a newspaper columnist. which of these two needs to fill up a quota of bullshit everyday and which need not say anything at all? right. i have no reason to believe the mets were liars, and even if they were it would serve a purpose- if yopu anounce to the world that you are going after Willis then the price for Willis just skyrocketed, but hey thats probably what Bret wants because then he can complain that the Mets overpaid for Willis as evidenced by his ridiculous Zito-trade above.

Which of the two needs to have a specific line of bullshit being spun, and which just needs to write down copy that, if true, gives him much needed credibility? Do you really thnk a columnist can write erroneous speculation as fact day after day and still retain the minimal redibiltiy he needs to do his job? That's a very naive way of looking at journalists.

You and Yancy need to have a serious discussion, because your "if they were it would serve a purpose" argument is the crux of what I'm telling him (and you). They lie because they want to plant stories in peoples' minds for very specific goals. There isn't enough salt in the Pacific for me to take their self-serving bullshit with.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

]Well, I resent the hell out of their wasting my time and I resent their pious attitude of scrupulous honesty in purveyng the bullshit with straight faces and I resent the way they reel you guys in.

Thanks for your concern but honestly, it's not necessary. I'm not as naive as you want to think, and if you're not either, what's the sense of being angry about it?

Some of the more loathsome Mofoites way back last century used to use this tactic. They intentionally suspend disbelief so as to have an "Gotcha!" in their pocket to use as future argument-makers.

[Elster88]

]Do you really thnk a columnist can write erroneous speculation as fact day after day and still retain the minimal redibiltiy he needs to do his job?

Yes. We discussed this with Healey.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

And how'd that work out?

[Willets Point]

seawolf17 wrote: Then why even talk about it? Let's just close up shop, shut down the Pool, and go be monks.

Would we have to root for the Padres then?

[Guest Rotblatt]

I think fundamentally how we respond to Mets PR comes down to whether or not we think they share our desire for a team that's competitve for the next couple of years.

I believe that they do want to build a highly competitive team, so even if I disagree with their strategy or their implementation of said strategy, I assume that their statements to the press are directed toward that end. I might get pissed off at a statement or a move, but it'd have to be pretty dramatic to change my fundamental belief that their top concern is building a championship team.

Bret, on the other hand, doesn't think the Mets are interested in anything more than making a buck, and so views their PR efforts as being solely directed at getting Mets fans to believe that management is mainly interested in building a championship team.

I suspect the only thing that would convince Bret otherwise would be for the Mets organization to be run well on a baseball level for at least a year or two--which, let's be honest, it hasn't been, at least not until recently.

And for us, I think it would take a deal on the magnitude of the one Bret laid out for us to go all "auctioning off our fandom" on the Mets.

In other words, arguing about this seems like a lose-lose for everyone.

[Elster88]

Rotblatt wrote: In other words, arguing about this seems like a lose-lose for everyone.

Which is why it's rarely brought up by the majority of posters.

[metirish]

[Guest Edgy DC]

Get some up-to-date photos. Can those ugly-assed spring-training togs.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Wow. Somebody at Newsday is a believer.

[Frayed Knot]

The Newsday story is no different from the Daily News one that we excerpted above; they're quoting NYM sources as saying that the recent pitching injuries aren't going to send them into a 'lets-panic-and-deal-the-kids' mode.

That they made a back-page spread over it reflects that it's a off-day (for both teams) more than a sign that they are accepting it as stone-cold truth - nor, as far as I can tell, is anyone here despite claims of posters all over the CPF being "reeled in".

[soupcan]

I saw that Jeff Fassero was designated for assignment by the Giants.

There's a fill-in for ya.

[nymr83]

trading the kids to replace scrubs is a bad idea in general...when a pedro/delgado/wright goes down and you still think you can win it this year thats when a blue chip prospect should be traded for help, trading one because "oh my god we lost zambrano" is a bad way to go.

sal, i'm NOT having the whole media discussion again, we beat it to death earlier this year.

but i will talk about the Mets "lying." do you really think a team SHOULD say they are interested in player x (nevermind the tampering rules)? i think that just raises player x's price.

[Guest abogdan]

Willie on the pregame w/Eddie C. says Jeremi Gonzalez is starting Friday, Lima Time on Saturday.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Nymr83 wrote: trading the kids to replace scrubs is a bad idea in general...when a pedro/delgado/wright goes down and you still think you can win it this year thats when a blue chip prospect should be traded for help, trading one because "oh my god we lost zambrano" is a bad way to go. sal, i'm NOT having the whole media discussion again, we beat it to death earlier this year. but i will talk about the Mets "lying." do you really think a team SHOULD say they are interested in player x (nevermind the tampering rules)? i think that just raises player x's price.

No, I just think it's a waste of our time paying any heed whatsoever to what teams or players say, except on the rare occasions when we think they may have blurted out some truth, which we can usually tell because it works against their own PR instincts. Like Pedro ragging on the media because Victor INO blew out his arm--that's stupid, and it makesPedro look like a douchebag, so maybe those were his genuine feelings. But if he'd given some Crash-Davis school of answering reporters' questions-type answer, that tells us nothing.

[Elster88]

Billy Beane said today (or maybe yesterday), for the 1,085,454,356th time by my count, that there is no way Zito gets traded.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Unless he does. In which case, nevermind.

[Guest KC]

BS: >>>I just think it's a waste of our time paying any heed whatsoever to what teams or players say, except on the rare occasions when we think they may have blurted out some truth<<<

Just an observation, and someone can RLF this if they deem approriate ...
Do you do embed this stuff in your posts on purpose? I mean, change a few
words around you're describing your behavior on this forum.

We just think it's a waste of time paying any heed whatsover to what Bret
types here, except on the rare occasions that he may be blurting out facts.

Weird, huh?

[metsmarathon]

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?

[Guest KC]

Are there any professional sports franchise teams that tell the press exactly
what they're thinking, planning, planned, suceeded at, failed to do? I'm sure
someone has mentioned this here, I've stopped reading, but I need to ask?
Why would a manager, GM, bat boy, HVAC guy at Shea tell the god damn
Daily Snooze, "yeah, we all knew after getting him that Zammo was a mistake
and now we're here in a penant race and need a good starter and here's our
hand so come ring the phones off our hooks and plant a bat up our ass for one?
Take our whole farm - come and get it - because we've given full disclosure
to please the whining former fans of our organization."

[Frayed Knot]

The thing about Beane is that he's virtually never traded a guy in mid-season who's coming up on FA-gency. People keep talking as if he needs to deal Zito or risk getting nothing for him ('cept draft picks) but that's not been his M.O.; not with Giambi, not Damon, not Isringhausen, not Tejada. I guess you have to go back to Kenny Rogers (nice pitcher but hardly Zito) in '99 to find a "major" player dealt at the deadline.
Now all that may change if/when Oakland drops out of things in the ALWest but that doesn't look like it's on the horizon anytime soon. Angels are stumbling, Seattle is bad, and does anyone think Texas will run away and hide?

He did deal both Hudson & Mulder but that was prior to the start of the season.

[Willets Point]

To follow up on FK, I think Beane likes getting the compensation draft picks so he can draft a bunch of sabermetrically-pleasing ballplayers out of college. That's the impression I got from Moneyball at least.

[Guest Edgy DC]

What was the compensation he got for Art Howe again?