What is Leadership?

[batmagadanleadoff]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Who's that between McGraw and Ryan? That must be Al Weis as the second-to-last in the front row, but who's the last guy? Is it Doogie Howser?

That's Jerry Grote again. And the other guy that-you-also-don't-know-who-he-is is also Jerry Grote. So's the mystery guy on the end. Jerry Grote.

[Benjamin Grimm]

So I've finally proven my long-standing theory that there are at least four Jerry Grote's.

Imagine how great it would be to shake hands with all of them!

[batmagadanleadoff]

Frayed Knot wrote: Keith & Mitchell in clubhouse while '86 playoff game going on = cute, funny story because team eventually won Rickey & Bobby in clubhouse while '99 playoff game going on = not caring bastards because team eventually lost

Well ... Bobby Bonilla was a goddamned bastard for playing cards in the clubhouse during that last game.

[G-Fafif]

From Page Six, the guest list here a bit intriguing.

]May 2, 2008 -- TO celebrate his 31st birthday the other night, Mets centerfielder Carlos Beltran craved some rice and beans with pollo frito, so he asked Jimmy Rodriguez to shut down his East 57th Street joint, Sofrito. Diving into the authentic Puerto Rican cuisine were teammates Jos� Reyes, Carlos Delgado, Oliver Perez and David Wright, as well as catching instructor Sandy Alomar Jr. When the band cranked up, pitcher Johan Santana rattled the maracas and Endy Chavez pounded the drums. Marc Anthony took the mike to sing "Feliz Cumplea�os" and "Mi Gente." Just when you thought it couldn't get any wilder, Jennifer Lopez grabbed the birthday boy and shook her world-renowned booty. Then, the crowd improvised a song with the lyric, "We're going to win the World Series." The team that plays together, stays together.

At the risk of overreading Los Mets subtext into the situation, I was rather elated to see David Wright among the celebrants. A leader on and off the field, bridging whatever cultural gaps may (or may not) exist among the players? Or just hungry for rice, beans and pollo frito? And will Beltran ask his pal Jimmy to open a concession at Citi Field to boost the Mets' ballpark food rating?

[metirish]

I've eaten at Sofrito(missus is from the PR) several times , great place and Jimmy Rodriguez is a hell of a nice guy.

[Guest AG/DC]

That means (1) you're one degree removed from partying with the Mets, my Celtorican friend, and (2) Johan Santana has a lot more personality than Johnnette Howard is picking up on.

[seawolf17]

She was probably just pissed that they didn't invite her.

[metirish]

It's worth a visit , pricey but that's how we roll......

http://www.sofritony.com/

[stevejrogers]

="Frayed Knot"] ] Keith & Mitchell in clubhouse while '86 playoff game going on = cute, funny story because team eventually won Rickey & Bobby in clubhouse while '99 playoff game going on = not caring bastards because team eventually lost While I agree with the general point, there are differences, -Hernandez often makes the point that after making the second out he was so damn disgusted that he just couldn't stand to be in the dugout and watch the season end (though it showed a lack of faith in Gary Carter) as opposed to the infamous card game where legend has it neither man knew of the outcome of the game until their dejected teammates started coming into the clubhouse. -Mitchell plainly wasn't expecting himself to be used at all and was doing something that he would have no other real time to do, book the next available flight to San Diego ASAP. You can kind of make a case that he was doing something worthwhile with his time at that moment. As opposed to playing a game of cards.

AG/DC May 02 2008 08:28 PM

Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view. Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over.

DocTee May 02 2008 09:51 PM

It's worth a visit , pricey but that's how we roll...... http://www.sofritony.com/ Ilitests-- if I can't wear my Timberlands, they ain't gettin' my money!

DocTee May 02 2008 09:52 PM

Met Irish] It's worth a visit , pricey but that's how we roll...... http://www.sofritony.com/ Ilitests-- if I can't wear my Timberlands, they ain't gettin' my money!

SteveJRogers May 02 2008 10:35 PM

="AG/DC"]Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view. Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over. Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership. I'm sure baseball (the only sport where players are allowed to come and go from the "sidelines" as they please) history is FILLED with such examples of Hernandez's not wanting to see an excruciating end to one hell of a season. The Mets win Game 6 of 1999 NLCS on the other hand, the card game would never be brought up at all.

AG/DC May 02 2008 10:43 PM

="SteveJRogers"] ="AG/DC"]Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view. Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over. Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership. I don't know why you would say that. ="SteveJRogers"][i'm sure baseball (the only sport where players are allowed to come and go from the "sidelines" as they please) history is FILLED with such examples of Hernandez's not wanting to see an excruciating end to one hell of a season. The Mets win Game 6 of 1999 NLCS on the other hand, the card game would never be brought up at all. These two paragraphs are not on opposite hands at all. I'm sure baseball is filled with examples of guys who are out of a game allegedly playing cards in the alleged clubhouse.

SteveJRogers May 02 2008 11:18 PM

="AG/DC"] SteveJRogers wrote: ="AG/DC"]Hernandez has Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership. I don't know why you would say that. Because it becomes a non story. And even so the media and fans would have given Hernandez a pass for it because "they would have done the same thing." In fact it probably would have enhanced Hernandez's "winner" mystique based on the fact that he didn't want to face seeing the Red Sox celebrate on his home field after such a great season. Just about anything. Actually, the only reason why it IS a story is because it's one of those quaint "people do silly superstitious things like never moving from their position" sort of stories. AG/DC May 02 2008 11:47 PM If it would be a non-story, then Henderson and Bonilla are a non-story. SteveJRogers May 02 2008 11:52 PM No, Henderson and Bonilla are NOT a non story because of what they were doing. Again, everyone would have given Hernandez a pass because "he is so much of a winner he hates to even WATCH the final out of his team loosing the World Series live in the dugout" The story with Henderson & Bonilla is that they were doing something completely unrelated, and legend has it they weren't even PAYING ATTENTION to the game. Hernandez at least was watching a TV. G-Fafif May 03 2008 03:51 AM From Tom Verducci's masterful 2003 SI profile, "What Is Rickey Henderson Doing In Newark?": ]Mets manager Bobby Valentine removed Henderson from Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS, replacing him with Melvin Mora. New York lost on a series-ending bases-loaded walk by Kenny Rogers. Henderson reportedly was in the clubhouse playing cards with teammate Bobby Bonilla when the deciding run scored. Asked about the incident, Henderson offers a qualified denial: "Kenny Rogers came in the clubhouse, and we was playing cards? If Kenny Rogers made it off that mound and we was playing cards, everybody in America, even the press, would have been there when we were playing. So you can't say that. "Was it an excuse? These two guys [Henderson and Bonilla], you had took us out. We tied the game up, and you took me and him right back out of the game. What for? For defensive purposes that you said? Moore [sic]? That's your judgment, and you're my chief and you're the manager. And I have no say-so. Does it frustrate me? Yes, because during the postseason I feel that's when the people that's gonna rise to the top should rise to the top, and I feel I was always one of them type of players." What he said. AG/DC May 03 2008 07:06 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 03 2008 07:33 AM Steve, a player who is still available dropping his pants and underpants and making plane reservations is more counterproductive to his team than a player who is out of a game doing anything. Allegedly doing anything. And anybody who can't stand to see his team lose ought to say so with his bat. Frayed Knot May 03 2008 07:19 AM ]the media and fans would have given Hernandez a pass for it because "they would have done the same thing." In fact it probably would have enhanced Hernandez's "winner" mystique based on the fact that he didn't want to face seeing the Red Sox celebrate on his home field after such a great season. Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying Now replace the Game 6 comeback with a Carter pop-out and does the Keith story retain the same warm fuzzy feeling? a) No way I'm going to pretend so AG/DC May 03 2008 07:35 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 03 2008 10:00 AM Replace "winner" with "whiner" in Steve's argument, though, and it works great. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 08:48 AM ="Frayed Knot"] Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying To be perfectly honest, many in the Met fan community would welcome that sort of display from Delgado, especially after this photo after the the last game of the season last year as well as his "About what?" comment about wheither he was disgusted with the current state of affairs with the Mets. DocTee May 03 2008 09:19 AM Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm? SteveJRogers May 03 2008 09:21 AM DocTee wrote: Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm? Yes, IIRC it was for a charity auction thing. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 09:50 AM Just for the record, I'm just arguing that I can see people's (media, fans) point in giving Hernandez a pass in the "Well thats what I would have done" vein. Same reasoning for Met fans to be disgusted with Glavine's reaction to his final Met performance (granted that was probably more Glavine/Braves haters having at it with him and if it was John Maine it would have been given the "gee the kid has a good, even keeled head on his shoulder" treatment). AG/DC May 03 2008 10:00 AM I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:03 AM AG/DC wrote: I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard. You and FK like getting the last word on me don't you? So admitting that I really don't care either way, despite listing excuses listed by Hernandez and saying that I see the media and fan's perspective on giving him and Mitchell a pass with the "cute story" approach while giving Henderson & Bonilla hell is another example of me doing a circular argument? metsmarathon May 03 2008 10:20 AM am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:22 AM metsmarathon wrote: am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? AG/DC May 03 2008 10:23 AM Steve, I didn't say anything about a circular argument. I guess it's not the first time when it's unclear when you're speaking for yourself or on behalf of the media. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:26 AM ]While I agree with the general point, there are differences, -Hernandez often makes the point that after making the second out he was so damn disgusted that he just couldn't stand to be in the dugout and watch the season end (though it showed a lack of faith in Gary Carter) as opposed to the infamous card game where legend has it neither man knew of the outcome of the game until their dejected teammates started coming into the clubhouse. OE: Speaking of unfairly treated Mets, I'm LOOPER! AG/DC May 03 2008 10:30 AM And you quote that 'cuz... SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:42 AM mm and you seem convinced that I'm backing down after you and FK argue against the points in my postings. AG/DC May 03 2008 10:51 AM I know not seem, Steve. I wrote that it's unclear when you're speaking on behalf of yourself or the media (or, as Thon mentions, some group of fans). I didn't say anything about backing down any more than I said anything about a circular argument. Are you arguing that you're not backing down (not that I'm saying you are). Because that would kind of not work with your outcry that I'm insisting on getting the last word in. cooby May 03 2008 12:14 PM SteveJRogers wrote: ="metsmarathon"]am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? Steve, you are a nice man and seem to be easily influenced by the opinions of others. But three groups of people that I can immediately think of off the top of my head that you should never ever ever allow to influence you in any way are MOFO posters and ESPN and/or WFAN callers. metsmarathon May 03 2008 07:49 PM SteveJRogers wrote: ="metsmarathon"]am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? yes. always cite your source. duh. especially when that source is you. Triple Dee May 07 2008 07:43 AM G-Fafif wrote: From Tom Verducci's masterful 2003 SI profile, "What Is Rickey Henderson Doing In Newark?": ]Mets manager Bobby Valentine removed Henderson from Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS, replacing him with Melvin Mora. New York lost on a series-ending bases-loaded walk by Kenny Rogers. Henderson reportedly was in the clubhouse playing cards with teammate Bobby Bonilla when the deciding run scored. Asked about the incident, Henderson offers a qualified denial: "Kenny Rogers came in the clubhouse, and we was playing cards? If Kenny Rogers made it off that mound and we was playing cards, everybody in America, even the press, would have been there when we were playing. So you can't say that. "Was it an excuse? These two guys [Henderson and Bonilla], you had took us out. We tied the game up, and you took me and him right back out of the game. What for? For defensive purposes that you said? Moore [sic]? That's your judgment, and you're my chief and you're the manager. And I have no say-so. Does it frustrate me? Yes, because during the postseason I feel that's when the people that's gonna rise to the top should rise to the top, and I feel I was always one of them type of players." What he said. Not to beat a dead horse or anything, but I don't believe it was the act of playing cards that infuriated everybody, but rather what Henderson said in his post game comments: "I was heartbroken. I had 2 pairs but Bobby had 3 jacks" That quote would make an awesome sig btw.

[Guest AG/DC]

Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view.

Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over.

[DocTee]

It's worth a visit , pricey but that's how we roll......

http://www.sofritony.com/

Ilitests-- if I can't wear my Timberlands, they ain't gettin' my money!

[DocTee]

Met Irish] It's worth a visit , pricey but that's how we roll...... http://www.sofritony.com/ Ilitests-- if I can't wear my Timberlands, they ain't gettin' my money!

[stevejrogers]

="AG/DC"]Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view. Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over.

Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership.

I'm sure baseball (the only sport where players are allowed to come and go from the "sidelines" as they please) history is FILLED with such examples of Hernandez's not wanting to see an excruciating end to one hell of a season.

The Mets win Game 6 of 1999 NLCS on the other hand, the card game would never be brought up at all.

[Guest AG/DC]

="SteveJRogers"] ="AG/DC"]Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view. Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over. Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership.

I don't know why you would say that.

="SteveJRogers"][i'm sure baseball (the only sport where players are allowed to come and go from the "sidelines" as they please) history is FILLED with such examples of Hernandez's not wanting to see an excruciating end to one hell of a season. The Mets win Game 6 of 1999 NLCS on the other hand, the card game would never be brought up at all.

These two paragraphs are not on opposite hands at all. I'm sure baseball is filled with examples of guys who are out of a game allegedly playing cards in the alleged clubhouse.

[stevejrogers]

="AG/DC"] SteveJRogers wrote: ="AG/DC"]Hernandez has Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership. I don't know why you would say that. Because it becomes a non story. And even so the media and fans would have given Hernandez a pass for it because "they would have done the same thing." In fact it probably would have enhanced Hernandez's "winner" mystique based on the fact that he didn't want to face seeing the Red Sox celebrate on his home field after such a great season. Just about anything. Actually, the only reason why it IS a story is because it's one of those quaint "people do silly superstitious things like never moving from their position" sort of stories.

AG/DC May 02 2008 11:47 PM

If it would be a non-story, then Henderson and Bonilla are a non-story.

SteveJRogers May 02 2008 11:52 PM

No, Henderson and Bonilla are NOT a non story because of what they were doing. Again, everyone would have given Hernandez a pass because "he is so much of a winner he hates to even WATCH the final out of his team loosing the World Series live in the dugout" The story with Henderson & Bonilla is that they were doing something completely unrelated, and legend has it they weren't even PAYING ATTENTION to the game. Hernandez at least was watching a TV.

G-Fafif May 03 2008 03:51 AM

From Tom Verducci's masterful 2003 SI profile, "What Is Rickey Henderson Doing In Newark?": ]Mets manager Bobby Valentine removed Henderson from Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS, replacing him with Melvin Mora. New York lost on a series-ending bases-loaded walk by Kenny Rogers. Henderson reportedly was in the clubhouse playing cards with teammate Bobby Bonilla when the deciding run scored. Asked about the incident, Henderson offers a qualified denial: "Kenny Rogers came in the clubhouse, and we was playing cards? If Kenny Rogers made it off that mound and we was playing cards, everybody in America, even the press, would have been there when we were playing. So you can't say that. "Was it an excuse? These two guys [Henderson and Bonilla], you had took us out. We tied the game up, and you took me and him right back out of the game. What for? For defensive purposes that you said? Moore [sic]? That's your judgment, and you're my chief and you're the manager. And I have no say-so. Does it frustrate me? Yes, because during the postseason I feel that's when the people that's gonna rise to the top should rise to the top, and I feel I was always one of them type of players." What he said.

AG/DC May 03 2008 07:06 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 03 2008 07:33 AM

Steve, a player who is still available dropping his pants and underpants and making plane reservations is more counterproductive to his team than a player who is out of a game doing anything. Allegedly doing anything. And anybody who can't stand to see his team lose ought to say so with his bat.

Frayed Knot May 03 2008 07:19 AM

]the media and fans would have given Hernandez a pass for it because "they would have done the same thing." In fact it probably would have enhanced Hernandez's "winner" mystique based on the fact that he didn't want to face seeing the Red Sox celebrate on his home field after such a great season. Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying Now replace the Game 6 comeback with a Carter pop-out and does the Keith story retain the same warm fuzzy feeling? a) No way I'm going to pretend so

AG/DC May 03 2008 07:35 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 03 2008 10:00 AM

Replace "winner" with "whiner" in Steve's argument, though, and it works great.

SteveJRogers May 03 2008 08:48 AM

="Frayed Knot"] Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying To be perfectly honest, many in the Met fan community would welcome that sort of display from Delgado, especially after this photo after the the last game of the season last year as well as his "About what?" comment about wheither he was disgusted with the current state of affairs with the Mets.

DocTee May 03 2008 09:19 AM

Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm?

SteveJRogers May 03 2008 09:21 AM

DocTee wrote: Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm? Yes, IIRC it was for a charity auction thing.

SteveJRogers May 03 2008 09:50 AM

Just for the record, I'm just arguing that I can see people's (media, fans) point in giving Hernandez a pass in the "Well thats what I would have done" vein. Same reasoning for Met fans to be disgusted with Glavine's reaction to his final Met performance (granted that was probably more Glavine/Braves haters having at it with him and if it was John Maine it would have been given the "gee the kid has a good, even keeled head on his shoulder" treatment).

AG/DC May 03 2008 10:00 AM

I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard.

SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:03 AM

AG/DC wrote: I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard. You and FK like getting the last word on me don't you? So admitting that I really don't care either way, despite listing excuses listed by Hernandez and saying that I see the media and fan's perspective on giving him and Mitchell a pass with the "cute story" approach while giving Henderson & Bonilla hell is another example of me doing a circular argument?

metsmarathon May 03 2008 10:20 AM

am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it.

SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:22 AM

metsmarathon wrote: am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever?

AG/DC May 03 2008 10:23 AM

Steve, I didn't say anything about a circular argument. I guess it's not the first time when it's unclear when you're speaking for yourself or on behalf of the media.

SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:26 AM

]While I agree with the general point, there are differences, -Hernandez often makes the point that after making the second out he was so damn disgusted that he just couldn't stand to be in the dugout and watch the season end (though it showed a lack of faith in Gary Carter) as opposed to the infamous card game where legend has it neither man knew of the outcome of the game until their dejected teammates started coming into the clubhouse. OE: Speaking of unfairly treated Mets, I'm LOOPER!

AG/DC May 03 2008 10:30 AM

And you quote that 'cuz...

SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:42 AM

mm and you seem convinced that I'm backing down after you and FK argue against the points in my postings.

AG/DC May 03 2008 10:51 AM

I know not seem, Steve. I wrote that it's unclear when you're speaking on behalf of yourself or the media (or, as Thon mentions, some group of fans). I didn't say anything about backing down any more than I said anything about a circular argument. Are you arguing that you're not backing down (not that I'm saying you are). Because that would kind of not work with your outcry that I'm insisting on getting the last word in.

cooby May 03 2008 12:14 PM

SteveJRogers wrote: ="metsmarathon"]am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? Steve, you are a nice man and seem to be easily influenced by the opinions of others. But three groups of people that I can immediately think of off the top of my head that you should never ever ever allow to influence you in any way are MOFO posters and ESPN and/or WFAN callers.

metsmarathon May 03 2008 07:49 PM

SteveJRogers wrote: ="metsmarathon"]am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? yes. always cite your source. duh. especially when that source is you.

Triple Dee May 07 2008 07:43 AM

G-Fafif wrote: From Tom Verducci's masterful 2003 SI profile, "What Is Rickey Henderson Doing In Newark?": ]Mets manager Bobby Valentine removed Henderson from Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS, replacing him with Melvin Mora. New York lost on a series-ending bases-loaded walk by Kenny Rogers. Henderson reportedly was in the clubhouse playing cards with teammate Bobby Bonilla when the deciding run scored. Asked about the incident, Henderson offers a qualified denial: "Kenny Rogers came in the clubhouse, and we was playing cards? If Kenny Rogers made it off that mound and we was playing cards, everybody in America, even the press, would have been there when we were playing. So you can't say that. "Was it an excuse? These two guys [Henderson and Bonilla], you had took us out. We tied the game up, and you took me and him right back out of the game. What for? For defensive purposes that you said? Moore [sic]? That's your judgment, and you're my chief and you're the manager. And I have no say-so. Does it frustrate me? Yes, because during the postseason I feel that's when the people that's gonna rise to the top should rise to the top, and I feel I was always one of them type of players." What he said. Not to beat a dead horse or anything, but I don't believe it was the act of playing cards that infuriated everybody, but rather what Henderson said in his post game comments: "I was heartbroken. I had 2 pairs but Bobby had 3 jacks" That quote would make an awesome sig btw.

[Guest AG/DC]

If it would be a non-story, then Henderson and Bonilla are a non-story.

[stevejrogers]

No, Henderson and Bonilla are NOT a non story because of what they were doing. Again, everyone would have given Hernandez a pass because "he is so much of a winner he hates to even WATCH the final out of his team loosing the World Series live in the dugout"

The story with Henderson & Bonilla is that they were doing something completely unrelated, and legend has it they weren't even PAYING ATTENTION to the game. Hernandez at least was watching a TV.

[G-Fafif]

From Tom Verducci's masterful 2003 SI profile, "What Is Rickey Henderson Doing In Newark?":

]Mets manager Bobby Valentine removed Henderson from Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS, replacing him with Melvin Mora. New York lost on a series-ending bases-loaded walk by Kenny Rogers. Henderson reportedly was in the clubhouse playing cards with teammate Bobby Bonilla when the deciding run scored. Asked about the incident, Henderson offers a qualified denial: "Kenny Rogers came in the clubhouse, and we was playing cards? If Kenny Rogers made it off that mound and we was playing cards, everybody in America, even the press, would have been there when we were playing. So you can't say that. "Was it an excuse? These two guys [Henderson and Bonilla], you had took us out. We tied the game up, and you took me and him right back out of the game. What for? For defensive purposes that you said? Moore [sic]? That's your judgment, and you're my chief and you're the manager. And I have no say-so. Does it frustrate me? Yes, because during the postseason I feel that's when the people that's gonna rise to the top should rise to the top, and I feel I was always one of them type of players."

What he said.

[Guest AG/DC]

Steve, a player who is still available dropping his pants and underpants and making plane reservations is more counterproductive to his team than a player who is out of a game doing anything. Allegedly doing anything.

And anybody who can't stand to see his team lose ought to say so with his bat.

[Frayed Knot]

]the media and fans would have given Hernandez a pass for it because "they would have done the same thing." In fact it probably would have enhanced Hernandez's "winner" mystique based on the fact that he didn't want to face seeing the Red Sox celebrate on his home field after such a great season.

Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself?

Possible answers:
a) No way
I'm lying


Now replace the Game 6 comeback with a Carter pop-out and does the Keith story retain the same warm fuzzy feeling?

a) No way
I'm going to pretend so

[Guest AG/DC]

Replace "winner" with "whiner" in Steve's argument, though, and it works great.

[stevejrogers]

="Frayed Knot"] Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying

To be perfectly honest, many in the Met fan community would welcome that sort of display from Delgado, especially after this photo after the the last game of the season last year



as well as his "About what?" comment about wheither he was disgusted with the current state of affairs with the Mets.

[DocTee]

Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm?

[stevejrogers]

DocTee wrote: Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm?

Yes, IIRC it was for a charity auction thing.

[stevejrogers]

Just for the record, I'm just arguing that I can see people's (media, fans) point in giving Hernandez a pass in the "Well thats what I would have done" vein.

Same reasoning for Met fans to be disgusted with Glavine's reaction to his final Met performance (granted that was probably more Glavine/Braves haters having at it with him and if it was John Maine it would have been given the "gee the kid has a good, even keeled head on his shoulder" treatment).

[Guest AG/DC]

I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard.

[stevejrogers]

AG/DC wrote: I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard.

You and FK like getting the last word on me don't you?

So admitting that I really don't care either way, despite listing excuses listed by Hernandez and saying that I see the media and fan's perspective on giving him and Mitchell a pass with the "cute story" approach while giving Henderson & Bonilla hell is another example of me doing a circular argument?

[metsmarathon]

am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective...

or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point...

i can't tell, because i just can't follow it.

[stevejrogers]

metsmarathon wrote: am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it.

Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever?

[Guest AG/DC]

Steve, I didn't say anything about a circular argument.

I guess it's not the first time when it's unclear when you're speaking for yourself or on behalf of the media.