Gary Carter diagnosed with small tumors on his brain

[Guest The Second Spitter]

Brain cancer picked a fight with the wrong warrior !!!!!

[G-Fafif]

Nice DiamondVision "our thoughts are with you" message to Gary Saturday night. And definitely noticed in an uptick in CARTER 8's in the stands.

Also spotted a GOTAY 6.

[metirish]

The news gets worse by the day it seems


Docs think Gary Carter has glioblastoma

By Ian Begley Special to ESPNNewYork.com NEW YORK -- The family of Hall of Fame catcher Gary Carter received an update from Duke University doctors on Carter's cancer diagnosis Saturday night. Doctors informed Carter's family that they were "99 percent sure" that he has a Grade 4 glioblastoma, which affects the brain and central nervous system. It is inoperable. read more http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=6605984

[Benjamin Grimm]

Geez. I saw a report the other day that suggested it was very treatable, and that chemo would likely take care of it.

Sounds like the diagnosis has taken quite a turn for the worse.

How awful.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

terrible news. yuk.

[metirish]

NYT

Surgery �Not a Good Option� for Carter, Who Has Aggressive Form of Brain Cancer

Gary Carter was diagnosed on Tuesday as having glioblastoma, an aggressive, fast-moving brain cancer that that will be treated with radiation and chemotherapy, but not with surgery, according to a statement from the Preston Robert Tisch Brain Cancer Center at Duke University Medical Center, where biopsies of the cancer were tested. Glioblastoma is the same cancer that has struck other baseball players and managers, including Bobby Murcer, Tug McGraw, Dick Howser, Dan Quisenberry and Johnny Oates.

you see those names and you go damn, not good outcomes....his doctor says average survival rate for patients after surgery, radiation and chemotherapy is 14 � months.

the whole article is here

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/01/sports/baseball/former-met-gary-carter-has-aggressive-brain-cancer.html?_r=1&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto

[Fman99]

That sucks.

[seawolf17]

Fman99 wrote: That sucks.

That. I don't know what else there is to say.

[Valadius]

It brings to mind Ted Kennedy. Again, if there were ever any plans to retire #8, you'd better do it now.

[Edgy MD]

Well, he's 22 years younger and presumably in far superior condition otherwise, so all other things being equal, I'd bet on the Kid.

[metirish]

Valadius wrote: It brings to mind Ted Kennedy. Again, if there were ever any plans to retire #8, you'd better do it now.

it brings to mind Bobby Murcer and Tug McGraw, Murcer was diagnosed on Christmas Eve, 2006 and died July 2008.Tug was diagnosed in March 2003 and dead by Jan. 2004.

Not trying to be doom and gloom here but it's as serious as it gets for Kid.

If you retire his # now it looks like you are doing it because he's not expected to be around? , how would it look , know what I mean?

[HahnSolo]

I wish health to Gary and peace to his family.

I really hesitate to talk about the retired # thing at the risk of being insensitive, but there are others who deserve their number up on the wall before Kid.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I agree. I don't think there are any additional numbers that ought to be retired, but if they were to retire a number, it should be 17.

[Edgy MD]

metirish wrote: If you retire his # now it looks like you are doing it because he's not expected to be around? , how would it look , know what I mean?

At the risk of being insensiitve, Carter might not mind such a scenario. An historical marker, a valedictory appearance, a chance to say goodbye.

He wouldn't count it as surrender, either. Micheal Landon was on Johnny Carson as his scenario was looking bleaker. He laughed and joked and frankly looked like a million bucks. He took the time to plug his new show and told CBS that they're gonna be sorry if he beats the cancer, because the show's gonna be a hit and he's gonna squeezed them for every penny.

He was gone like a week later. I guess my point is that you can say goodbye while maintainig that it's not necessarily goodbye.

[bmfc1]

The "pro" argument is that he was big part of the Mets '86 WS team and he has been deemed worthy of admission to Cooperstown.

If you don't retire the number then either you withhold it from use, which is a half-measure, or you give it to the Ronnie Paulino's of the world and wonder why a non-entity is wearing Gary Carter's number.

I can see the "con" argument, but I'll go with the above.

[Guest metsguyinmichigan]

I don't have a problem retiring his number -- Greg can print more shirts! -- and I think it would be nice to have some kind of Gary Carter Day.

He's in the Hall, he wanted to go in as a Met. The team hasn't been issuing the number anyway, right? I really don't have a problem if they'd add 8, 17, 24 and 31 to the wall.

[soupcan]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I agree. I don't think there are any additional numbers that ought to be retired, but if they were to retire a number, it should be 17.

If they decide to retire 8, they could do a couple of things -

They could present the situation to Carter and let him decide whether he would like them to retire his number now. If he gave them the go-ahead then it's not insensitive.

To get around the '17 or 8' question, they could retire both numbers together in the same ceremony. I suppose Mex might feel slighted at having to share the ceremony but then again, maybe not.

[Guest themetfairy]

I don't think the Mets are retiring any more numbers until Mike Piazza enters the Hall of Fame with NY on his plaque cap.

As for Gary, while I try to live my life optimistically, I'm also a doctor's daughter. Honestly, when I heard that there were four brain tumors, I knew that this was bad news. I have met a lot of brain cancer and brain tumor survivors through my Team McGraw activities, but I've never heard of anyone having a good long-term prognosis after that kind of a diagnosis.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Part of the reason the Mets have skimped on retiring numbers is evident in the records books: they haven't produced-- or held, at least during their prime, and for several years-- that many capital-G great players.

Keith-- my favorite of all-time, along with Fonzie-- is probably an iffy case... and, at the risk of seeming insensitive, Gary presents a much weaker one (sentiment aside).

Have him at CF as much as his health allows. Make this into the summer of celebrating this ebullient, tough, most Metly dude's life. But don't retire his number... or at least, don't do it if you weren't going to.

[Met Hunter]

Didn't they have a Gary Carter Day back in 2003 after he made the Hall?

I say no to retiring his number. Only because he's not first in the list of deserving Mets after Seaver. The 1986 Mets will be honored some time this season. If he's healthy enough to come in, then honor him that day along with his team. That's what they did with Tug back in 2003 with the 1973 team.

[Edgy MD]

Good thinking.

Not sure what they have planned, but hopefully this sparks their commitment to make it special and sparks his teammates' commitment to make it back.

They can introduce him last this time.

[G-Fafif]

Met Hunter wrote: Didn't they have a Gary Carter Day back in 2003 after he made the Hall? I say no to retiring his number. Only because he's not first in the list of deserving Mets after Seaver. The 1986 Mets will be honored some time this season. If he's healthy enough to come in, then honor him that day along with his team. That's what they did with Tug back in 2003 with the 1973 team.

They did. It was incredibly lame, but they did.

I second your emotion on gathering the champions this summer and making Gary the focal point as they did with Tug eight years ago. The Mets have have wormed away from doing an OTD for the 25th anniversary (cost, mostly) but this seems like a good impetus to get the band back together. Hell, half of them work for the organization anyway.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Here's an idea (that isn't likely to come to pass):

If the Nationals are going to absord the Expos records (and I think that they did) then maybe the Nats ought to retire Carter's uni. The Nats could organize a very Expo-centric tribute to honor both Carter and the Expos heritage that the Nats undoubtedly inherited and have been ignoring, so far. This isn't exactly a perfect scenario, because Carter's career happened entirely during that interregnum where there was no Washington major league baseball; Carter never thrilled the Washington fans because he didn't play in front of them. One compromise might be for the Nats to retire Carter's number during a game against the Mets, thus providing a logical reason to invite both ex-Mets and ex-Expos, and other players that were an important part of Carter's career.

I'm long-ago on record as not inclined to retire Carter's uni. If Carter's great Expo career didn't exist; if Carter was a rookie in 1985 and his career consisted of two impact seasons followed by a sharp fade, would this even be a discussion? Carter's greatness was already established before he ever put on the Mets uniform. The way I see it, Carter's Met career is most analagous to Donn Clendenon's - brief, but essential to a championship -- and that's not intended to be a knock on Carter, but perhaps a call for more recognition on behalf of Clendenon's Met accomplishments.

[Frayed Knot]

The Nats barely acknowledge the existence of the Expos.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Frayed Knot wrote: The Nats barely acknowledge the existence of the Expos.

Acknowledged. My idea isn't a realistic one.

[Edgy MD]

I don't think it's that farfetched. The Nats could certainly awaken to reconsidering theiir Expo legacy.

They're more or less grabbing at straws trying to establish a culture.

[metirish]

Edgy DC wrote: I don't think it's that farfetched. The Nats could certainly awaken to reconsidering theiir Expo legacy. They're more or less grabbing at straws trying to establish a culture.

is it true that there is nothing in the Nats stadium to indicate an Expos past?

[Edgy MD]

I'd hesitate to say nothing. I seem to remember Tim Raines being acknowledged somewhere.

But it would be cool as top-shelf Quebec sorbet to have Raines, Rusty Staub, Andre Dawson, and Gary Carter show up for Expos Heritage Night and get their numbers re-retired.

[Frayed Knot]

I've seen virtually nothing in the stadium and the only occasional mentions of the Montreal roots that come during telecasts are from trivia contests that have to go back longer than five years because there's not enough material otherwise.
The other problem is that the Nats get almost no help in promoting themselves or baseball in general in that town from from the mainstream sports media contingent whose idea of sports talk is to interrupt their Redskins talk with more Redskins talk ... and that's in June.

[Guest The Second Spitter]

metirish wrote: Edgy DC wrote: I don't think it's that farfetched. The Nats could certainly awaken to reconsidering theiir Expo legacy. They're more or less grabbing at straws trying to establish a culture. is it true that there is nothing in the Nats stadium to indicate an Expos past?

They finally relented and put all retired Expos numbers on display last year .......next to the Senators numbers and numbers commemorating certain Homestead Grays players.

The tenuous connection with DC baseball of the latter supports the view the organization is clueless about its priorities.