Benjamin Grimm

I think this probably warrants a 50-game suspension.

From December 19, 2005: Close-fit clothes and wavy hair And basket catches filled with flair Great expectations everywhere I looked at Mazz that way. But now he's just a Yankee bum One of George's favorite sons I oft' forget the good he's done The years get in the way. I've looked at Mazz from both sides now From Bronx and Queens and still somehow The young Mazzilli I recall Wasn't what I thought at all. Thrills and chills and joy so real That Seattle homer made me feel Those years before he snitched on Zeile I looked at Mazz that way. But now he's just a friend of Joe Player loyalties come and go Although we care, they don't, you know They're in it for the pay. I've looked at Mazz from both sides now A Met, a Yank, and still somehow Those wide-eyed days that I recall I really didn't know Mazz at all. Years of cheers and feeling proud To say "Let's Go Mets" really loud Dreams and screams from within the crowd I watched the Mets that way I'm still a fan, that'll never change They're still my Mets though their names are strange With innocence lost, perspective's gained I see them a new way I've looked at Mazz from both sides now From Bronx and Queens and still somehow The young Mazzilli I recall Wasn't what I thought at all. I've looked at Mazz from both sides now A Met, a Yank, and still somehow Those wide-eyed days that I recall I really didn't know Mazz at all.

Were we aware of the first offense?

Wait till you see what happens when it hits 7.5%.

Jon Heyman wrote: Considering the Mets' excellent pitching prospect list, the bigger issue may be the money, and if the Mets are to give up top young players they'd expect a decent-sized financial return. Tulowitzki has $118-million remaining over six seasons, which isn't unreasonable considering his immense talent, but the Mets would expect some offset considering the top young players they'd have to surrender in such a deal. The more decent-sized the financial return, the more open to this trade I'd be.

I agree with Vic. I'd be reluctant to take Tulowitski even if all the Mets had to give up were some old tomatoes from Joe Pignatano's garden.

I tried something different� I wanted to try to make it look like someone had painted the Mets logo on a snowball. I don't think it quite worked.

I can just see the headline now: METS DUMP PROSPECT DUE TO FORUM SNIT FIT

I think assuming "this season" is probably a stretch. My guess for Dilson is that they'll keep in in Las Vegas until May (the usual ploy to delay arbitration and free agency) especially since, with Murphy likely to at least start the season as a Met, they won't need to rush him. Where he's at in July or August is anyone's guess. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Dilson start 2016 as the Mets regular second baseman.

My first thought was travel. I'd love to be able to go to Cuba.

1979 was certainly the end of the 1970s. It wasn't, however, the end of the 198th decade. That ended at the end of 1980. We just don't count decades the way we do centuries. Anyone who says that 1980 was still the 1970s is just plain wrong. Similarly, the 1900s ended on December 31, 1999, but the 20th Century ended on December 31, 2000.

Reports today suggest that a Mets bid for Kang is "unlikely."

I expect Montero is likely to be traded. When someone asks for Syndergaard, Sandy will say no, but how about Montero? Some will say no thanks, but I think eventually someone will say okay.

I voted yes, with my yes meaning they should put in a reasonable bid. If they're outbid, so be it. If they win the bidding, then try to sign Kang. 2015 would be the year you try him at shortstop. If it turns out he can hit, but is better suited for second base, then you slide him over there next year. Or trade him.

The only way I ever knew which Mets were attractive was is if my teen-age sister had a crush on them: Lee Mazzilli, Rick Aguilera, Scott Holman, Danny Heep. (And emphatically NOT Ron Hodges or Sid Fernandez.) She's 45 now, and no longer pays attention to the Mets, so I'm clueless. Maybe when I see her at Christmas I'll show her a picture of Anthony Recker and see what she thinks.

I don't see it, but I'm often surprised at what's considered handsome.

seawolf17 wrote: I can't believe this is a thing. Neither can I! I thought his perceived attractiveness was just a CPF thing.

Look how young Mr. Met was! He still had his hair!

The National League has avoided the DH for over 40 years. What makes you think that will change in the next few years?

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: That's really what the Wilpon-hate is about. Mets fans want them to operate at a loss cause they're rich and this is NY and suck it up and do so. No, I want them to accept that they can't afford to run a New York City sports franchise as it ought to be run, and they should sell to someone who can. same thing. Same thing? The Wilpons keeping the team and losing money and selling the team are the same thing???

Ceetar wrote: That's really what the Wilpon-hate is about. Mets fans want them to operate at a loss cause they're rich and this is NY and suck it up and do so. No, I want them to accept that they can't afford to run a New York City sports franchise as it ought to be run, and they should sell to someone who can.

Last year I went to five Mets games, but two of them were in Pittsburgh and two were in Seattle. The Mets haven't been getting too much of my money for quite a while now. Getting up to Queens from where I live is too much of a hassle for me to do it regularly. Even when the Mets were contending (2006 through 2008) I'd still only go two or three times per year. The Madoff thing really had the Wilpons on the ropes; I was hoping it would lead to their being forced to sell the team. But they managed to survive that (I really suspect that Bud Selig owns a lot of the blame for this) and now I think that we're stuck with them for the long haul. Making their tenure as miserable as possible is a nice idea, though.

Frayed Knot wrote: Sure, but the idea this winter is that we need a SS. If you sign Kang it's not going to be for him to sit around for a year waiting for Murphy to hit FA status. My thinking was that Kang could play shortstop in 2015, and if it turns out he's better suited to second base, he could move there in 2016.

Well, the Mets have an incumbent at second base whose time is almost certain to end after 2015, if not before.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: All I ever get is blah blah blah in defense of the Wilpons Has ANYONE here ever defended the Wilpons? What forum are you reading? We may roll our eyes at how you keep pounding the same drum, but that's a far cry from "defending the Wilpons."