Jump to content
Grand Central Mets
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Posted


Ceetar wrote:
no, actually, what happened is exactly as I describe, there was an injury that was discovered medically after repeated attempts to pitch.

Which describes most injuries.

It's not clear how repeated the attempts to pitch were. What is clear is that he was grinding against the reality of the injury at his insistence, not at the management's insistence. Difference = Large.

Dan Fuckin' Warthan:

"If he's throwing that way, then there's got to be something incorrect in that arm," Warthen said. "Something's not feeling correct. John's a habitual liar in a lot of ways as far as his own health. He's a competitor and a warrior. He wants to go out there and pitch. But we have to be smart enough to realize this guy isn't right, the ball's not coming out of his hand correctly."


Completely vindicated.

John Fuckin' Maine:

"No, I didn't get a chance, and I think that's what I'm most upset about," he said. "They said they saw something, so they're taking me out. I'm a little hurt by that. It wasn't 100 m.p.h. the first pitch. I never got asked to really see how I was or anything like that. They just said I was out. That's what upset me the most."


In denial.

And Ceetar:

The Mets kept finding nothing wrong with John Maine to the point of calling him a liar, turned out they needed to do a different type of MRI and he'd been injured all along.


In denial.


  • Replies 312
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted


In short, what we're talking about here is a player apparently (the story isn't yet clear) arguing that he's injured when the team cannot currently find anything. And the accusation that the team (in the person of the manager) is going to force him to "man up."

What you describe is a player arguing that he's well, when the team insists he's injured. And him insisting on manning up against the wishes of his manager and pitching coach.


Grand Central Contributor
Posted


nope, and again this isn't really about Maine, who they'd already run tests on and found nothing. He'd struggled all season. There was plenty of chatter about removing him from the rotation as it was. The doctors and tests said he was healthy and he's at risk of losing his job. Whether or not he was actually feeling pain/soreness/whatever (which there is no way the Mets weren't aware of, given trainers and treatments and what not) is really irrelevant. He was going to go out there and pitch. It's a totally different thing than a guy already shut down and in rehab.


(and that's STILL on management. You either shut him down if you think something's wrong to the point of no velocity in warm-ups/earlier, or you give him more than a batter to hang himself with)

You're only talking about the point where the discussion came to a head, forgetting that there were months of fits and starts in regards to Maine's performance and arm that night.

That lack of a plan was part of why Manuel's the worst Mets manager I've ever watched. He managed that night like John Maine's condition was a total surprise and yanked him with basically no plans beside "get him out of here" . I wouldn't be surprised of Warthan said he shouldn't go and was overruled. His comment might very well have been a cover for that.


Posted


Ceetar wrote:
nope

That's an argument?

Ceetar wrote:
and again this isn't really about Maine,

Again? This is the first time you've made that claim. And you're the one who brought him up. If you have a larger point that his case doesn't support, you perhaps shouldn't bring him up. If his case does not support your larger point, your larger point is undermined.

who they'd already run tests on and found nothing.


He's been injured on and off for years at this point. He'd had a bone spur removed a year and a half earlier that was described by surgeons as the largest they'd ever extracted. They'd found plenty.

Enough. Your example hurts your argument. You are still in there pitching it and you need to be removed from the game.


Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket
Guests
Posted




Grand Central Contributor
Posted


no, it doesn't, you just choose to argue a different point.

Guy who had had tests as recently as the offseason and or a few months ago is struggling to pitch. Is he a headcase or is there something that's not showing up.

Just so we're clear, if I'm wrong, you're saying Montero's mostly a headcase here and not hurt?


Guest themetfairy
Guests
Posted


Adam Rubin tweets that Bobby Parnell is headed for the DL.

Logan Verrett wins the race to reclaim Number 35.


Posted


Are you allowed to strong-arm someone to the disabled list? That sounds kind of hinky to me. Does an injured player have to approve his assignment to the DL? And an uninjured player, of course, shouldn't be on the DL at all.


Posted


Yeah, it seems as if they are stretching the rules. "Elbow fatigue" is the official injury...though it appears "ineffectiveness" would be a better diagnosis.

I'm not sure what the Mets were expecting from Parnell since his rehab appearances were very similar to what he was able to do in the majors.


Guest d'Kong76
Guests
Posted


Yeah, I'm surprised at the wording of all that. Maybe it's just
exaggerated a little bit to add some bite to it all...


Posted


TransMonk wrote:
Yeah, it seems as if they are stretching the rules. "Elbow fatigue" is the official injury...though it appears "ineffectiveness" would be a better diagnosis.

I'm not sure what the Mets were expecting from Parnell since his rehab appearances were very similar to what he was able to do in the majors.


Well, let us keep in mind that he performed over his first 13 appearances, putting up 0.73 ERA, walking four and striking out eight in 12 1/3 innings.

It's only over the last 10 appearances that things have gone hinky-shaped, walking eight and striking out two in 7 innings, while posting a 14.10 ERA.

That's about as hinky as they come. It's hideous hinky.


Posted


The fact that they're giving Parnell options (albeit not Good ones) means they can claim that they're not really strong-arming him to the DL.
But the DL route virtually assures him to be back by Sept 1st (as long as the "injury" is healed by that point of course) where the demotion or cut options don't. Plus he accrues ML service time while out as opposed to not via the others (although it looks like he's already got his 6+ for FA over the winter).


Guest Mets Guy in Michigan
Guests
Posted


Has Puma, or anyone else, actually sourced this strong arm claim?


Posted


"According to an industry source..."


That may not seem like much to you, but when your name is Mike F. Puma, you make the rules yourself with your own bare hands.


Guest Mets Guy in Michigan
Guests
Posted


Edgy MD wrote:
"According to an industry source..."


That may not seem like much to you, but when your name is Mike F. Puma, you make the rules yourself with your own bare hands.


Exactly! Who in the hell is an "industry source" and how the hell would he know? Imagine if he A) Asked Parnell, or B) Asked Terry or Sandy?


Posted


The fact that they're giving Parnell options (albeit not Good ones) means they can claim that they're not really strong-arming him to the DL.
But the DL route virtually assures him to be back by Sept 1st (as long as the "injury" is healed by that point of course) where the demotion or cut options don't. Plus he accrues ML service time while out as opposed to not via the others (although it looks like he's already got his 6+ for FA over the winter).

I can just hear the conversation now:
Sandy: We're putting you on the disabled list.
Parnell: Why?
Sandy: Broken arm.
Parnell: I don't have a broken arm.
Sandy: It can be arranged. Fred still knows people in Brooklyn.
Parnell: OK. I'll go on the DL.


Later


Posted


Mets Guy in Michigan wrote:
Edgy MD wrote:
"According to an industry source..."


That may not seem like much to you, but when your name is Mike F. Puma, you make the rules yourself with your own bare hands.


Exactly! Who in the hell is an "industry source" and how the hell would he know? Imagine if he A) Asked Parnell, or B) Asked Terry or Sandy?

The thing is, unnamed sources in themselves aren't bad things. But there is supposed to be a standard. Something like having independent confirmation from a second source.

And yeah, a basic part of the job is to call the principles � Parnell, his agent, Alderson � if only to get a no-comment, which you would print as such. I mean, you have a story alleging that the Mets are gaining an advantage by breaking � or at least circumventing � the rules. Honor your own scoop and do the full job, Mike.

But congrats on the scoop. EAT IT, RUBIN!


Posted


Lucas Duda's back reportedly seized up, necessitating his removal from this evening's game. Mets allegedly plan to give him tomorrow off and re-evaluate him Sunday. But needing another pitcher might force their hand.


Posted


Six skerless for Matz pitching for Bingo.

One hit, no walks, and six strikeouts.

Working on a 60-pitch limit, he somehow managed to pull off those six innings in 56 pitches, an average of 9.33 per inning. Of those 56, 41 (73.21%) went for strikes.

Mets haven't decided if he's to get one more start in the minors or return to join the Flushing Nine.


Posted


Steven Matz threw for Binghamton yesterday, going 5.1 innings, giving up 1 hit, 0 runs, walking 2 and striking out 4. He left with a 2-0 lead but his Bingo-pen blew that up for him and they lost 6-2.

He's un-scored upon in 15 innings during his rehabilitation. I'm guessing he's done with that noise. On the other hand, the Mets may want him to join Las Vegas for the playoffs.


Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
The Grand Central Mets Caretaker Fund
The Grand Central Mets Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Mets community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...