Benjamin Grimm

Says his recovery is going fine and he hopes to pitch in September.

Thanks a lot, Obamacare!

Oh! I thought it was Don Grant who objected to Reggie on that account. (I guess I'm conflating the whole 1975 Cleon Jones thing.)

Good job!

I think that with each week that passes, Drew to the Mets looks more and more likely. I know that they still want a veteran reliever, but if it's true that they were offering $12 million/2 years to Grant Balfour, that means they still have money to spend.

Bob Scheffing?

Ask him, "What does the fox say?"

batmagadanleadoff wrote: See if you can find a picture of him with Tim McGraw's mom for the "Mistress Watch" thread.

metsguyinmichigan wrote: Divided allegiances between Cubs and Braves?I'm sure that's it, but I think of him in Atlanta much more than in Chicago. Cox and Glavine will have Atlanta caps on their plaques. Torre a Yankee, Thomas a White Sock.

So was this really about Grant Balfour?

LaRussa and Maddux to have "blank" caps on the Hall of Fame plaques.

Best name for a pitcher since "Bob Walk".

Looks like there was a seven-player deal with the Padres...

Of his recent movies, the only one I've seen is Midnight in Paris and that one wasn't bad. Before that, I think the last one I saw was The Mighty Aphrodite. Just last week, I watched Play it Again, Sam (from 1972) and it was pretty good. A few really funny laugh-out-loud moments.

Toni Darling?

He'd probably be happy with a bright shiny object.

Reports leaking out that WOR wanted to fire Howie Rose but the Mets intervened.

...have signed minor league contracts with the Mets.

Ideally, this will help get the calls right, which is important, and they'd find other ways to shave 20 minutes or so off the average game time, which is unlikely.

Adam Rubin wrote: Johan Santana's no-hitter -- the only one in Mets history -- arguably has an asterisk. But it would have stood as a no-hitter, even if the new instant-replay rules had been in effect on June 1, 2012, according to Major League Baseball. To backtrack, Carlos Beltran hit a sixth-inning line drive down the third-base line, which was ruled foul by third-base ump Adrian Johnson. In actuality, the ball struck the chalk line and should have been ruled a fair ball. Under the new replay rules, only outfield fair/foul calls are able to be reviewed -- not those in the infield. And by infield, MLB means those in front of the umpire, according to a league official. So even though Beltran's liner first touched the ground beyond the third-base bag, it was not a play that would have been reviewed. MLB may adjust the rule in future seasons to make that type of play reviewable. But, for now, the league doesn't want to be involved with having to place runners on the correct bases if it can help it. I'm not sure I understand. Did Beltran's drive hit the foul line in front of the umpire? I seem to remember it happening in short left field; I would have thought it would have been beyond where the umpire was standing. And anyway, even if the ball is behind the umpire, you still could have to figure out where to place runners. If a fair ball is changed to foul, of course, it's easy. But if a ball hits the foul line just short of the warning track, and there are runners on base, and the ball is called foul and then overruled, you will have to figure out where to place the runners. It's unavoidable. I guess players could complete the play, like they do in football when a flag is thrown. But that would be quite a cultural change; both teams would have to learn to ignore the foul call by the umpire whenever it's close.

Ashie62 wrote: Baseball has done just fine for over 100 years without these changes. If it ain't broke... That kind of argument never makes sense to me.

What do they mean by "Timing Play" and "Record Keeping"?

I didn't see the movie, so I don't know if it was any good, but I kinda was expecting some nominations for Lee Daniels' The Butler (despite its stupid name).

I've seen American Hustle and Gravity. Loved Gravity, was mildly entertained by American Hustle. (I agree with Vic, it's very much overrated.) Of the others, I definitely would like to see 12 Years a Slave and Nebraska. And I'm kinda curious about Her. I may eventually watch Wolf of Wall Street but after The Departed I've had more than enough of Martin Scorsese. (Although I liked Hugo a lot.) I knew Meryl Streep would be nominated for August: Osage County. I haven't seen the movie, but it was a completely predictable choice. I think I'll be rooting for Sandra Bullock in that category.

I'm not familiar with Amed Rosario. I'll have to look him up.