IGT--Braves @ Mets, 08/20/09

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Winning run at the plate. Cmon Muffy. Send me to Project Runway on a high...

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Oh well, we lose another series by playing worse than the other team. I'm dectecting a pattern.

OK, Tim Gunn, let's start a new thread, if you know what I mean...

[Piggiestomatoes]

Great at-bat young Daniel. FUCK!

[nymr83]

Another night, another loss. I hate this team.

[Guest Kong76]

ny83: I hate this team <<<

Didn't we do this last night or the night before? See ya tomorrow.

[Gwreck]

Braves lineup was

Infante 2B
Anderson LF
Jones 3B
McCann C
Escobar SS
Diaz RF
LaRoche 1B
Church CF
Kawakami P

---

Wagner got a nice ovation. They played Sandman and everything. Lots of cheering for his 2 Ks. I always liked Wagner.

Pretty much everything else about this game was crappy.

Forget just releasing Livan...how about we release Schneider, too? Surely there's an AAA catcher somewhere we could use instead. Or even Cancel.

First time I've seen Johan take a loss since Ben Sheets outdueld him in Johan's Shea debut last year.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

="Edgy DC":2slkp9v1]I think I just heard a nice ovation for Billy Wagner getting up in the pen. Do people at Citi know when somebody is up in the pen?[/quote:2slkp9v1] They flashed it on the big board. People around me seemed a little excited that he was throwing and applauded pretty wildly. I joined in, since I'll give it up for a 37-year-old who works his wee, bearded ass off to come back from TJ surgery, and because I didn't want to feel left out. (Then again, there was a wave going around, too. So figure about 1/4 of the cheers were of the "Hey-- it's other humans standing and sitting in series!" variety.) Muggy night. Got into a friendly argument with a chatty stranger on the Danny Heep Bridge about the future of first base-- it really does amaze me how much support Murph still gets among Met fans. (I mean, I'm rooting for the guy too, but... he's OPSing sub-.700 at this point; I'm not sure he's a corner-IF starter for most AAA teams.)

OlerudOwned Aug 20 2009 11:14 PM

Seeing Wagner pitch so well bummed me out even more about all the injuries. A healthy team with Rodriguez-Putz-Wagner-Feliciano in the late innings would have been something to see. Stupid baseball.

Nymr83 Aug 21 2009 12:20 AM

in fairness there would have been no Rodriguez (or no Putz) at all if Wagner was healthy all along. ]Then again, there was a wave going around, too i usually either get people to stand up too soon (to help fuck up the wave) or yell "fuck the wave!" as it goes by and i remain seated. i really hate the wave during a game.

metirish Aug 21 2009 05:55 AM

="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":cqcvmdie] ="Edgy DC":cqcvmdie]I think I just heard a nice ovation for Billy Wagner getting up in the pen. Do people at Citi know when somebody is up in the pen?[/quote:cqcvmdie] They flashed it on the big board. People around me seemed a little excited that he was throwing and applauded pretty wildly. I joined in, since I'll give it up for a 37-year-old who works his wee, bearded ass off to come back from TJ surgery, and because I didn't want to feel left out. (Then again, there was a wave going around, too. So figure about 1/4 of the cheers were of the "Hey-- it's other humans standing and sitting in series!" variety.) Muggy night. Got into a friendly argument with a chatty stranger on the Danny Heep Bridge about the future of first base-- it really does amaze me how much support Murph still gets among Met fans. (I mean, I'm rooting for the guy too, but... he's OPSing sub-.700 at this point; I'm not sure he's a corner-IF starter for most AAA teams.)[/quote:cqcvmdie] I thought it was a nice moment.... Gwreck Aug 21 2009 07:49 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":de47vpmo]it really does amaze me how much support Murph still gets among Met fans. (I mean, I'm rooting for the guy too, but... he's OPSing sub-.700 at this point; I'm not sure he's a corner-IF starter for most AAA teams.)[/quote:de47vpmo] We were discussing that last night. Is it because he's a clean-cut white guy? Because he's Irish? Because he's a homegrown player? A little each from categories A, B and C? Because it's certainly not that he's particularly good. Edgy DC Aug 21 2009 07:56 AM But he was some'at last year, so there may be a little bit of D (residual fuzzies from rookie success) in there also. That first pitch popup was so not the solid countworking Murphy I hope I see when he steps out of the dugout, and too rarely is he that guy these days, and maybe never will be. Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 07:58 AM Maybe it's because Murphy looked really good late last season, and we still want him to be the guy that it looked like he might be. And part of it is we're probably paying less attention this season, when he's not doing so great, than we did last year, when the games mattered more and he was looking good. I don't want to give up on him yet, but I also don't think the Mets should pencil him in as the answer at any one position next year. And especially not at a high-offense position like first base. Keep him around. Make him a Joe McEwing. And if he proves that he can be more than that, then reevaluate. Gwreck Aug 21 2009 08:20 AM This is where I point out that I think resigning Delgado is our best option for next year if we plan to compete. John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 21 2009 08:29 AM I like Ike. John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 21 2009 08:33 AM ="Edgy DC"] That first pitch popup was so not the solid countworking Murphy I hope I see when he steps out of the dugout, and too rarely is he that guy these days, and maybe never will be. Well, he's mad about it, at least: Edgy DC Aug 21 2009 08:45 AM Other available freegies, with thier 2010 age in parentheses: Russell Branyan (34): .254 / .351 / .515 // .866 (107 g, 33 at first) Jason Giambi (39): .193 / .332 / .364 // .697 (83 g, 38 at first) Ross Gload (34): .263 / .344 / .394 // .738 (93 g, about half on defense, 26 at first) Aubrey Huff (33): .252 / .320 / .400 // .720 (112 g, 93 on defense) Nick Johnson (31, parts of him much older): .296 / .419 / .408 // .827 (111 g, 108 on defense) Adam LaRoche (30): .267 / .354 / .484 // .838 (103 g, all on defense) Robb Quinlan (33): 256 / .287 / .367 // .654 (40 103 gg, 11 at first) Matt Stairs (42!): .213 / .357 / .388 // .745 (16 g, none at first since 2007) Mike Sweeney (36): .228 / .287 / .361 // .648 (49 g, 5 at first) Jim Thome (39): .250 / .380 / .503 // .883 (97 g, none on defense) Chad Tracy (30): .235 / .292 / .380 // .673 (73 g) So, the only ones looking as viable as Delgado are Branyan, Johnson, and LaRoche, with only LaRoche looking particularly more viable. John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 21 2009 08:46 AM Edgy DC Aug 21 2009 08:54 AM Met that up a little bit, market it, and it can pay for Lunchpail's sophomore year at Barnard. TransMonk Aug 21 2009 09:20 AM In Murphy's defense, he is still very inexperienced at the professional level. David Wright had more minor league plate appearances before he was called up to the majors than Murphy has had minor and major league combined. Wright's minor league career: 1675 PA, 1419 AB, 409 H, 111 2B, 48 HR, 242 RBI, 302 K, .288/.387/.474/.861 Murphy's minor+major league career: 1634 PA, 1450 AB, 411 H, 91 2B, 35 HR, 214 RBI, 195 K, .283/.347/.431/.778 Now, I don't believe that Murphy will ever be Wright, but he is still very young and can still progress to better than we've seen this season. I'm not ready to pencil him in at any position either, but I'm not ready to call him Joe McEwing or Matt Franco just yet. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 21 2009 09:28 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"] Given his hyyyyyyuge split differensh, I wouldn't mind seeing a cheap, lefty-mashing running mate next campaign. Ike/Stick in '10! Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 09:29 AM I wouldn't call him Joe McEwing either. (It would get confusing, since that's not his name.) But I think that's the best way to use him, for 2010, at least, until he proves that he deserves a regular position. Find eight other guys to man the starting positions, and keep Murphy around as a super-sub, one who will play often enough to get 250 to 300 at bats. Give him the chance to prove that he can do more, without counting on him to do more. If he's anointed the Mets starting 1B this winter, it will be a pretty discouraging sign. Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 09:32 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]I wouldn't mind seeing a cheap, lefty-mashing running mate next campaign. Would Trot Nixon be an appropriate running mate for someone named Ike? Or should we dust off Otis Nixon? Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 09:36 AM And that reminds me... When I was in college, I had a friend who was flirting with this girl, and it seemed to be going pretty well, when for no explicable reason, he told her, "I have a five-year-old son named Otis." (He didn't.) She visibly lost interest in him. So he frantically told her that it was just a joke, that he didn't really have a son named Otis. But it was too late. She either figured that he was suddenly denying his little boy's existence, or he was some kind of a nut who makes up fictional kids named Otis to impress girls. (I guess the second part was actually true.) Note to you single guys out there: The fictional-son-named-Otis line... not a good idea.

[Guest OlerudOwned]

Seeing Wagner pitch so well bummed me out even more about all the injuries. A healthy team with Rodriguez-Putz-Wagner-Feliciano in the late innings would have been something to see.

Stupid baseball.

[nymr83]

in fairness there would have been no Rodriguez (or no Putz) at all if Wagner was healthy all along.

]Then again, there was a wave going around, too

i usually either get people to stand up too soon (to help fuck up the wave) or yell "fuck the wave!" as it goes by and i remain seated. i really hate the wave during a game.

[metirish]

="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":cqcvmdie] ="Edgy DC":cqcvmdie]I think I just heard a nice ovation for Billy Wagner getting up in the pen. Do people at Citi know when somebody is up in the pen?[/quote:cqcvmdie] They flashed it on the big board. People around me seemed a little excited that he was throwing and applauded pretty wildly. I joined in, since I'll give it up for a 37-year-old who works his wee, bearded ass off to come back from TJ surgery, and because I didn't want to feel left out. (Then again, there was a wave going around, too. So figure about 1/4 of the cheers were of the "Hey-- it's other humans standing and sitting in series!" variety.) Muggy night. Got into a friendly argument with a chatty stranger on the Danny Heep Bridge about the future of first base-- it really does amaze me how much support Murph still gets among Met fans. (I mean, I'm rooting for the guy too, but... he's OPSing sub-.700 at this point; I'm not sure he's a corner-IF starter for most AAA teams.)[/quote:cqcvmdie] I thought it was a nice moment.... Gwreck Aug 21 2009 07:49 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":de47vpmo]it really does amaze me how much support Murph still gets among Met fans. (I mean, I'm rooting for the guy too, but... he's OPSing sub-.700 at this point; I'm not sure he's a corner-IF starter for most AAA teams.)[/quote:de47vpmo] We were discussing that last night. Is it because he's a clean-cut white guy? Because he's Irish? Because he's a homegrown player? A little each from categories A, B and C? Because it's certainly not that he's particularly good. Edgy DC Aug 21 2009 07:56 AM But he was some'at last year, so there may be a little bit of D (residual fuzzies from rookie success) in there also. That first pitch popup was so not the solid countworking Murphy I hope I see when he steps out of the dugout, and too rarely is he that guy these days, and maybe never will be. Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 07:58 AM Maybe it's because Murphy looked really good late last season, and we still want him to be the guy that it looked like he might be. And part of it is we're probably paying less attention this season, when he's not doing so great, than we did last year, when the games mattered more and he was looking good. I don't want to give up on him yet, but I also don't think the Mets should pencil him in as the answer at any one position next year. And especially not at a high-offense position like first base. Keep him around. Make him a Joe McEwing. And if he proves that he can be more than that, then reevaluate. Gwreck Aug 21 2009 08:20 AM This is where I point out that I think resigning Delgado is our best option for next year if we plan to compete. John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 21 2009 08:29 AM I like Ike. John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 21 2009 08:33 AM ="Edgy DC"] That first pitch popup was so not the solid countworking Murphy I hope I see when he steps out of the dugout, and too rarely is he that guy these days, and maybe never will be. Well, he's mad about it, at least: Edgy DC Aug 21 2009 08:45 AM Other available freegies, with thier 2010 age in parentheses: Russell Branyan (34): .254 / .351 / .515 // .866 (107 g, 33 at first) Jason Giambi (39): .193 / .332 / .364 // .697 (83 g, 38 at first) Ross Gload (34): .263 / .344 / .394 // .738 (93 g, about half on defense, 26 at first) Aubrey Huff (33): .252 / .320 / .400 // .720 (112 g, 93 on defense) Nick Johnson (31, parts of him much older): .296 / .419 / .408 // .827 (111 g, 108 on defense) Adam LaRoche (30): .267 / .354 / .484 // .838 (103 g, all on defense) Robb Quinlan (33): 256 / .287 / .367 // .654 (40 103 gg, 11 at first) Matt Stairs (42!): .213 / .357 / .388 // .745 (16 g, none at first since 2007) Mike Sweeney (36): .228 / .287 / .361 // .648 (49 g, 5 at first) Jim Thome (39): .250 / .380 / .503 // .883 (97 g, none on defense) Chad Tracy (30): .235 / .292 / .380 // .673 (73 g) So, the only ones looking as viable as Delgado are Branyan, Johnson, and LaRoche, with only LaRoche looking particularly more viable. John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 21 2009 08:46 AM Edgy DC Aug 21 2009 08:54 AM Met that up a little bit, market it, and it can pay for Lunchpail's sophomore year at Barnard. TransMonk Aug 21 2009 09:20 AM In Murphy's defense, he is still very inexperienced at the professional level. David Wright had more minor league plate appearances before he was called up to the majors than Murphy has had minor and major league combined. Wright's minor league career: 1675 PA, 1419 AB, 409 H, 111 2B, 48 HR, 242 RBI, 302 K, .288/.387/.474/.861 Murphy's minor+major league career: 1634 PA, 1450 AB, 411 H, 91 2B, 35 HR, 214 RBI, 195 K, .283/.347/.431/.778 Now, I don't believe that Murphy will ever be Wright, but he is still very young and can still progress to better than we've seen this season. I'm not ready to pencil him in at any position either, but I'm not ready to call him Joe McEwing or Matt Franco just yet. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 21 2009 09:28 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"] Given his hyyyyyyuge split differensh, I wouldn't mind seeing a cheap, lefty-mashing running mate next campaign. Ike/Stick in '10! Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 09:29 AM I wouldn't call him Joe McEwing either. (It would get confusing, since that's not his name.) But I think that's the best way to use him, for 2010, at least, until he proves that he deserves a regular position. Find eight other guys to man the starting positions, and keep Murphy around as a super-sub, one who will play often enough to get 250 to 300 at bats. Give him the chance to prove that he can do more, without counting on him to do more. If he's anointed the Mets starting 1B this winter, it will be a pretty discouraging sign. Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 09:32 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]I wouldn't mind seeing a cheap, lefty-mashing running mate next campaign. Would Trot Nixon be an appropriate running mate for someone named Ike? Or should we dust off Otis Nixon? Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 09:36 AM And that reminds me... When I was in college, I had a friend who was flirting with this girl, and it seemed to be going pretty well, when for no explicable reason, he told her, "I have a five-year-old son named Otis." (He didn't.) She visibly lost interest in him. So he frantically told her that it was just a joke, that he didn't really have a son named Otis. But it was too late. She either figured that he was suddenly denying his little boy's existence, or he was some kind of a nut who makes up fictional kids named Otis to impress girls. (I guess the second part was actually true.) Note to you single guys out there: The fictional-son-named-Otis line... not a good idea.

[Gwreck]

="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":de47vpmo]it really does amaze me how much support Murph still gets among Met fans. (I mean, I'm rooting for the guy too, but... he's OPSing sub-.700 at this point; I'm not sure he's a corner-IF starter for most AAA teams.)[/quote:de47vpmo] We were discussing that last night. Is it because he's a clean-cut white guy? Because he's Irish? Because he's a homegrown player? A little each from categories A, B and C? Because it's certainly not that he's particularly good.

Edgy DC Aug 21 2009 07:56 AM

But he was some'at last year, so there may be a little bit of D (residual fuzzies from rookie success) in there also. That first pitch popup was so not the solid countworking Murphy I hope I see when he steps out of the dugout, and too rarely is he that guy these days, and maybe never will be.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 07:58 AM

Maybe it's because Murphy looked really good late last season, and we still want him to be the guy that it looked like he might be. And part of it is we're probably paying less attention this season, when he's not doing so great, than we did last year, when the games mattered more and he was looking good. I don't want to give up on him yet, but I also don't think the Mets should pencil him in as the answer at any one position next year. And especially not at a high-offense position like first base. Keep him around. Make him a Joe McEwing. And if he proves that he can be more than that, then reevaluate.

Gwreck Aug 21 2009 08:20 AM

This is where I point out that I think resigning Delgado is our best option for next year if we plan to compete.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 21 2009 08:29 AM

I like Ike.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 21 2009 08:33 AM

="Edgy DC"] That first pitch popup was so not the solid countworking Murphy I hope I see when he steps out of the dugout, and too rarely is he that guy these days, and maybe never will be. Well, he's mad about it, at least:

Edgy DC Aug 21 2009 08:45 AM

Other available freegies, with thier 2010 age in parentheses: Russell Branyan (34): .254 / .351 / .515 // .866 (107 g, 33 at first) Jason Giambi (39): .193 / .332 / .364 // .697 (83 g, 38 at first) Ross Gload (34): .263 / .344 / .394 // .738 (93 g, about half on defense, 26 at first) Aubrey Huff (33): .252 / .320 / .400 // .720 (112 g, 93 on defense) Nick Johnson (31, parts of him much older): .296 / .419 / .408 // .827 (111 g, 108 on defense) Adam LaRoche (30): .267 / .354 / .484 // .838 (103 g, all on defense) Robb Quinlan (33): 256 / .287 / .367 // .654 (40 103 gg, 11 at first) Matt Stairs (42!): .213 / .357 / .388 // .745 (16 g, none at first since 2007) Mike Sweeney (36): .228 / .287 / .361 // .648 (49 g, 5 at first) Jim Thome (39): .250 / .380 / .503 // .883 (97 g, none on defense) Chad Tracy (30): .235 / .292 / .380 // .673 (73 g) So, the only ones looking as viable as Delgado are Branyan, Johnson, and LaRoche, with only LaRoche looking particularly more viable.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 21 2009 08:46 AM

Edgy DC Aug 21 2009 08:54 AM

Met that up a little bit, market it, and it can pay for Lunchpail's sophomore year at Barnard.

TransMonk Aug 21 2009 09:20 AM

In Murphy's defense, he is still very inexperienced at the professional level. David Wright had more minor league plate appearances before he was called up to the majors than Murphy has had minor and major league combined. Wright's minor league career: 1675 PA, 1419 AB, 409 H, 111 2B, 48 HR, 242 RBI, 302 K, .288/.387/.474/.861 Murphy's minor+major league career: 1634 PA, 1450 AB, 411 H, 91 2B, 35 HR, 214 RBI, 195 K, .283/.347/.431/.778 Now, I don't believe that Murphy will ever be Wright, but he is still very young and can still progress to better than we've seen this season. I'm not ready to pencil him in at any position either, but I'm not ready to call him Joe McEwing or Matt Franco just yet.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 21 2009 09:28 AM

="John Cougar Lunchbucket"] Given his hyyyyyyuge split differensh, I wouldn't mind seeing a cheap, lefty-mashing running mate next campaign. Ike/Stick in '10!

Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 09:29 AM

I wouldn't call him Joe McEwing either. (It would get confusing, since that's not his name.) But I think that's the best way to use him, for 2010, at least, until he proves that he deserves a regular position. Find eight other guys to man the starting positions, and keep Murphy around as a super-sub, one who will play often enough to get 250 to 300 at bats. Give him the chance to prove that he can do more, without counting on him to do more. If he's anointed the Mets starting 1B this winter, it will be a pretty discouraging sign.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 09:32 AM

="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]I wouldn't mind seeing a cheap, lefty-mashing running mate next campaign. Would Trot Nixon be an appropriate running mate for someone named Ike? Or should we dust off Otis Nixon?

Benjamin Grimm Aug 21 2009 09:36 AM

And that reminds me... When I was in college, I had a friend who was flirting with this girl, and it seemed to be going pretty well, when for no explicable reason, he told her, "I have a five-year-old son named Otis." (He didn't.) She visibly lost interest in him. So he frantically told her that it was just a joke, that he didn't really have a son named Otis. But it was too late. She either figured that he was suddenly denying his little boy's existence, or he was some kind of a nut who makes up fictional kids named Otis to impress girls. (I guess the second part was actually true.) Note to you single guys out there: The fictional-son-named-Otis line... not a good idea.

[Guest Edgy DC]

But he was some'at last year, so there may be a little bit of D (residual fuzzies from rookie success) in there also.

That first pitch popup was so not the solid countworking Murphy I hope I see when he steps out of the dugout, and too rarely is he that guy these days, and maybe never will be.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Maybe it's because Murphy looked really good late last season, and we still want him to be the guy that it looked like he might be.

And part of it is we're probably paying less attention this season, when he's not doing so great, than we did last year, when the games mattered more and he was looking good.

I don't want to give up on him yet, but I also don't think the Mets should pencil him in as the answer at any one position next year. And especially not at a high-offense position like first base.

Keep him around. Make him a Joe McEwing. And if he proves that he can be more than that, then reevaluate.

[Gwreck]

This is where I point out that I think resigning Delgado is our best option for next year if we plan to compete.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I like Ike.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

="Edgy DC"] That first pitch popup was so not the solid countworking Murphy I hope I see when he steps out of the dugout, and too rarely is he that guy these days, and maybe never will be.

Well, he's mad about it, at least:

[Guest Edgy DC]

Other available freegies, with thier 2010 age in parentheses:

• Russell Branyan (34): .254 / .351 / .515 // .866 (107 g, 33 at first)
  
  
• Jason Giambi (39): .193 / .332 / .364 // .697 (83 g, 38 at first)
  


• Ross Gload (34): .263 / .344 / .394 // .738 (93 g, about half on defense, 26 at first)
  


• Aubrey Huff (33): .252 / .320 / .400 // .720 (112 g, 93 on defense)
  


• Nick Johnson (31, parts of him much older): .296 / .419 / .408 // .827 (111 g, 108 on defense)
  


• Adam LaRoche (30): .267 / .354 / .484 // .838 (103 g, all on defense)
  


• Robb Quinlan (33): 256 / .287 / .367 // .654 (40 103 gg, 11 at first)
  


• Matt Stairs (42!): .213 / .357 / .388 // .745 (16 g, none at first since 2007)
  


• Mike Sweeney (36): .228 / .287 / .361 // .648 (49 g, 5 at first)
  


• Jim Thome (39): .250 / .380 / .503 // .883 (97 g, none on defense)
  


• Chad Tracy (30): .235 / .292 / .380 // .673 (73 g)

So, the only ones looking as viable as Delgado are Branyan, Johnson, and LaRoche, with only LaRoche looking particularly more viable.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

[Guest Edgy DC]

Met that up a little bit, market it, and it can pay for Lunchpail's sophomore year at Barnard.

[TransMonk]

In Murphy's defense, he is still very inexperienced at the professional level. David Wright had more minor league plate appearances before he was called up to the majors than Murphy has had minor and major league combined.

Wright's minor league career: 1675 PA, 1419 AB, 409 H, 111 2B, 48 HR, 242 RBI, 302 K, .288/.387/.474/.861

Murphy's minor+major league career: 1634 PA, 1450 AB, 411 H, 91 2B, 35 HR, 214 RBI, 195 K, .283/.347/.431/.778

Now, I don't believe that Murphy will ever be Wright, but he is still very young and can still progress to better than we've seen this season.

I'm not ready to pencil him in at any position either, but I'm not ready to call him Joe McEwing or Matt Franco just yet.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]

Given his hyyyyyyuge split differensh, I wouldn't mind seeing a cheap, lefty-mashing running mate next campaign.

Ike/Stick in '10!

[Benjamin Grimm]

I wouldn't call him Joe McEwing either. (It would get confusing, since that's not his name.)

But I think that's the best way to use him, for 2010, at least, until he proves that he deserves a regular position.

Find eight other guys to man the starting positions, and keep Murphy around as a super-sub, one who will play often enough to get 250 to 300 at bats. Give him the chance to prove that he can do more, without counting on him to do more.

If he's anointed the Mets starting 1B this winter, it will be a pretty discouraging sign.

[Benjamin Grimm]

="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]I wouldn't mind seeing a cheap, lefty-mashing running mate next campaign.

Would Trot Nixon be an appropriate running mate for someone named Ike?

Or should we dust off Otis Nixon?

[Benjamin Grimm]

And that reminds me...

When I was in college, I had a friend who was flirting with this girl, and it seemed to be going pretty well, when for no explicable reason, he told her, "I have a five-year-old son named Otis." (He didn't.)

She visibly lost interest in him. So he frantically told her that it was just a joke, that he didn't really have a son named Otis.

But it was too late. She either figured that he was suddenly denying his little boy's existence, or he was some kind of a nut who makes up fictional kids named Otis to impress girls. (I guess the second part was actually true.)

Note to you single guys out there: The fictional-son-named-Otis line... not a good idea.