Benjamin Grimm

That's a good point. After September 1 he won't have to displace anybody, and he could come in handy.

Yeah, what cheapskates! They should have given up more!

I remember back in the last decade, when the Mets were last contending for the playoffs, I created a metric called NHOP. (Necessary Happy Outcome Percentage) The NHOP in effect combines the magic number with the number of games remaining, but unlike the magic number, it can go up or down but as with the magic number, the lower the number is, the better. For our purposes, of course, a "happy outcome" is either a Mets win or a Washington loss. As of right now, the Mets and Nationals have a combined 82 games remaining, and we need a happy outcome in 37 (the current magic number) of those games. The current NHOP is, therefore, 0.451 which means that if 45.1 per cent of the games go the right way, the Mets win the division. (Or at least, finish ahead of the Nationals which probably means the same thing.) I backtracked a bit, and this chart shows how the magic number, and the NHOP, have been changing over the last few weeks. DateMets RecordNationals RecordMets LeadMagic NumberGames RemainingNHOPAugust 356-5054-501571140.500August 457-5055-501561120.500August 558-5055-512541100.491August 658-5056-511.5541090.495August 759-5056-522.5521070.486August 859-5157-521.5521050.495August 959-5257-531.5511030.495August 1060-5258-531.5501010.495August 1161-5258-542.548990.485August 1262-5258-553.546970.474August 1363-5258-564.544950.463August 1463-5358-574.543930.462August 1563-5458-584.542910.462August 1663-5558-594.541890.461August 1763-5558-594.541890.461August 1864-5559-594.540870.460August 1964-5660-593.540850.471August 2064-5660-60439840.464August 2165-5660-61537820.451

Baseball Prospectus now has the Mets at 85.7 per cent to win the NL East, and 0.2 per cent for the wild card. Mets are also now only two games behind the Dodgers, which means they have a shot at being the division winner with the second-best record which would give them home field advantage over the NL West in the Division Series. Given their home/road differential, that could be pretty important.

I didn't, but I was watching the Colorado telecast.

I would've given him the last two inning in Friday's game.

Fiers had more complete games last night than the Mets have had all season.

Edgy MD wrote: On Sunday, May 10, 2009, the Mets beat the Pirates, 8�4, and achieved a winning percentage of .480 or more for the first time in their history. I don't recall that we were aware of this at the time. Were we? We should've been!

I just finished watching this game about five minutes ago. I went to bed last night knowing that the Nationals had lost, but completely unaware of anything about the Mets-Rockies game. When I was walking the dog this morning before I watched the game I found myself thinking that the magic number was either 38 or 37. Happily, I now know that it's 37. When the score went to 7-1 I was thinking that the game wouldn't have much suspense. I was wrong. Also, right now I'm willing to have the Mets give Yoenis Cespedes a twenty-year contract. I expect that feeling will fade a bit.

Cespedes 6 Granderson 1 d'Arnaud 1 Conforto 1 Murphy 1

Where is your Boise team playing? Against who? Why would Scherzer or hell Puello, even consider playing for them? Where are they getting the money to pay competitive rates anyway? ="Ceetar, 12]My facts were relevant to MLB's monopoly and your point that the Boise Huskers couldn't sign Max Scherzer, when in fact they can.

Yeah, like the Long Island Ducks would be a viable option for Max Scherzer. What would benefit the players would be if we could turn back the clock to 1902 or so, when the American and National League were true rivals and there was no farm system and no draft, without, of course, restoring the reserve clause. High school and college players would have the ability to shop their talents around before signing. If, after a year in Louisville you can find a better deal in Omaha, you sign with Omaha for next year. And then if you succeed, maybe Kansas City or Cincinnati will come to you with an offer.

In 45 years as a Mets fan, I've seen quite a bit of losing!

Edgy MD wrote: It wouldn't be AAA. And I don't expect the Mets would be relegated. Because they're awesome. And they have me supporting them. But really, the idea of creating a fair and just system is to consider it not merely by guessing how it would affect us � for we have certainly been disproportionately blessed � but by how it would affect all members of society ... which would have a huge influence on how it would affect us. I expect there's probably a way to create a fair and just system that doesn't include the possibility of a team dropping out of the major leagues.

If the Mets got sent down to AAA, I wouldn't find another team to root for, I'd just stop paying attention. It might take a year or so, but they'd totally lose me, and probably would never get me back.

Sounds like he's ready for a call-up!

Well, the magic number has to be seen in the context of how many games remain. A magic number of 20 is great when there are 35 games remaining, but not so great when there are 22 games remaining.

The first thing that jumped out at me from that chart is that Forbes apparently doesn't know how to spell "Pittsburgh".

themetfairy wrote: 40! The magic number is actually 39. Nationals have 60 losses and the Mets have 64 wins.

I wouldn't. I could easily see the Mets spending 8 to 10 years in AAA. It would be an interesting setup if I was an impartial observer.

Edgy MD wrote: But yeah, the one-inning-reliever thing is murder. It's one of the things I find most irritating about the modern version of the game. I understand limiting Verrett if he's going to start on Sunday, but the other guys should have each gotten more innings. Why burn through your bullpen like that when the game could go into extra innings? And why save Familia for a "save situation" which may mean something in the stats column but means nothing in the standings? I can only think of two statistical rules that affect a manager's decisions. One of them, the rule that a starter needs five innings to get a win, rarely comes into play so it's less irritating. But the save rule has a frequent impact on the game and it's absurd. I want the Mets to hire the manager, whoever he (or she) is who is smart enough to see that.

Clippard 1 Flores 2 Granderson 0.5 Lagares 0.5 Murphy 2 Verrett 1 d'Arnaud 0.5

I always assumed it was named after Steve Dallas, of Bloom County.

I do think Northern New Jersey should have a team, and so should Connecticut. And there should be American League teams in Philadelphia and St. Louis, maybe not in the city but in the outer suburbs. (If the Athletics leave Oakland I'd love to see them go to King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.)

Edgy MD wrote: ConnecticutNorfolk/Virginia BeachBuffaloVancouverSan JuanCharlotteMexico CityMonterreyHonoluluNew OrleansUm...Er...Indianapolis?Dallas?... Tennessee. San Jose.