nymr83

Gwreck wrote: You don't put the tying run on base. Francisco gets paid big-boy money to get Albert out here. you do when its the best hitter in the league surrounded by a weak lineup.

put Pujols on 1st please.

Elster88 wrote: Nick Evans gets at least one more start. three more if one of those wives is his.

NICK EVANS says: the answer is in the minors!

Sheffield had a cortisone shot

="Gwreck":1a8sk3gv]It might not be top 3 but the 6/23 game (2 hits over 9 innings) is on this lsit.[/quote:1a8sk3gv] to me its not, i'd consider the "worst losses" to involve blowing leads in spectacular fashion, failing to tie up a game despite loading the bases with nobody out, etc. when the other pitcher just shuts you down you shrug your shoulders and get ready for tommorow. i wont remember this loss soon enough. metirish Jun 24 2009 04:45 AM It's on my list. I thought it was embarrassing they way Pineiro mowed them down . I've no problem with getting shut down by an elite pitcher , he is not one of those. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 24 2009 06:49 AM Pineiro handled a healthier version of this team during the St. Louis games, so this didn't exactly come out of nowhere. "This team," by the way, was a couple of different roster moves away from starting Wily Mo Pena and Argenis Reyes. All of which is to say, I respectfully disagree-- this doesn't come close to the neighborhood of being in the vicinity of shouting distance of my list. Centerfield Jun 24 2009 07:54 AM Last night's game pissed me off, and it's about as "unfun" as a game can be, but it wasn't the kind that rips your heart out and stomps on it. I'm serious, I think this contest is over after the Castillo game. Gwreck Jun 24 2009 07:58 AM I don't disagree, but the thread title says "Losses" (ie. plural). Centerfield Jun 24 2009 08:03 AM That's true. For me, the Castillo Game, the Pittsburgh game, the Church Misses Third Game, and the Murphy Drops the Fly Ball game were all worse. I think last night would have been a miserable game to go to. But as long as I could change the channel, last night wasn't excruciating. metirish Jun 24 2009 08:05 AM I'm sure there will be worse losses and yeah the Castillo game will live long in my memory but last nights game while it didn't claw my heart out it was in my opinion a shitty loss, we waste a fine start by Hernandez and can't touch the other guy and our manager didn't paint himself in glory either. themetfairy Jun 24 2009 08:11 AM I'm with CF here. The worst losses are the Castillo-esque ones. Last night was just a bad game, but it didn't grab defeat from the jaws of victory in a heart-wrenching manner. Hawkeye57 Jun 24 2009 08:23 AM Agreed, two hitters happen every now and again and aren't always remembered. Castillo's error, missing third base, those things will probably be remembered more than a two hitter. Wouldn't rate yesterday as a huge loss, but it was tough. Gwreck Jun 24 2009 08:44 AM I'm very surprised to be so strongly outvoted here. For the record, there have been a total of three other games put in this thread: 1. Church misses third/Reed throwing error to end game (at LA) 2. Bullpen meltdown (at Pittsburgh) 3. Castillo drops flyball (at Yankees). --- I guess I missed the memo where this list was limited to 3 games. Edgy DC Jun 24 2009 08:49 AM It seems to be elusive that you're not trying to knock the Castillo game down the list, but rather trying to add to the bottom. I think you should flesh out a top ten right NOW!!!! and then we can argue and (hopefully not) add to the list and knock some games off of it as the season progresses. As long as we similarly maintain the list of top wins. metirish Jun 24 2009 08:53 AM ="Gwreck"]I'm very surprised to be so strongly outvoted here. For the record, there have been a total of three other games put in this thread: 1. Church misses third/Reed throwing error to end game (at LA) 2. Bullpen meltdown (at Pittsburgh) 3. Castillo drops flyball (at Yankees). --- I guess I missed the memo where this list was limited to 3 games. Thanks for this little list......I am going to add last nights game to that list , will it be there at the end of the season as one of the worst losses? , maybe not but right now it is. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 24 2009 09:21 AM I'm gonna throw last Thursday's game onto this list, at No. 4, and suggest April 21 at St. Louis for No. 5 (Perez blows a 4-0 lead, Murphy misplays a fly ball into a triple, Putz sucks, Mets lose 6-4). Edgy DC Jun 24 2009 09:25 AM 6-4 is the score of the season. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 24 2009 09:35 AM Second all of JCL's choices. We're missing a bunch of Phil losses, no? The two blown-in-the-seventh Phils losses on 6/10 and 6/11 (Beltran dropped flyball opens gates for three runs in 7th, 5-4 loss in extra innings on Utley HR, spoiled Pelf start; and Redding spoils his own 3-1 lead/Ibanez nails Takahashi in 11th) stung. Also, I was in CBP for the walking party on 5/2 (Ollie walks 6/doesn't last 3; Takahashi makes great debut, but Feliciano tagged by Ibanez; Mets come back behind Castro and Murphy HRs; Beltran first-and-third DP in top of 11 kills a threat, followed by Bad Sean Green walking Victorino for winning run). It sucked. Fman99 Jun 24 2009 09:58 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":ys44xiw2] Also, I was in CBP for the walking party on 5/2 (Ollie walks 6/doesn't last 3; Takahashi makes great debut, but Feliciano tagged by Ibanez; Mets come back behind Castro and Murphy HRs; Beltran first-and-third DP in top of 11 kills a threat, followed by Bad Sean Green walking Victorino for winning run). It sucked.[/quote:ys44xiw2] I'd add this one. I watched this on TV and it was a turd. Anytime the Cryin Hawaiian is scoring the winning run against the Mets auto-qualifies for this list doesn't it? Frayed Knot Jun 24 2009 10:43 AM I view this thread a way to track those games which either are, or will be, eligible for a 'Top 10' (read: bottom) at the end of the year. We've had those best/worst 10 threads in the past although it's much tougher trying to reconstruct those by looking back than it is tallying them as they go by. Bottom line: I'm OK nominating last night's even though I agree with the view that I don't think it'll make my final cut. Gwreck Jun 24 2009 11:46 AM I guess the Johan meltdown in the Bronx also goes in the bottom 10. SteveJRogers Jul 05 2009 02:20 PM I'm nominating all three games from this weekend, 7/3-7/5. As much of a must sweep/take two out of three as a series can be in the first week of July, and the Mets end up getting swept, falling 5 back in the loss column. A lost weekend to be sure. Fman99 Jul 05 2009 07:16 PM This was an awful series to be sure, but none of these games have that crotchpunchitude that some of the other ones do. Even the bad defense on Saturday was after they were trailing and didn't really affect the score. So, to me, none of these games as individual events make this list. metirish Jul 05 2009 07:30 PM I think I have become immune to such losses and this weekend sweep was not the least surprising. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jul 05 2009 10:25 PM This weekend-- right up to and including today's Johan Game TM-- had a sick inexorability to it. Depressing, yes. But, sadly, all too expected. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jul 17 2009 08:56 PM I'm going to nominate Thursday's game, a 5-3 loss to the Braves in the first game back from the Break. Very typical of the 09 Mets but for the fact nobody got hurt and nobody made an egregious error. But a loss like so many others: Not enough offense, all the scoring confined to a single inning, outs and at-bats given away. We were tied and played not to lose, wasting our best relievers who needed (and received) bailouts from the back-end anyway, so everyone is good and used up in the first game of a 10-game road trip. Not to mention it snapped another modest win streak at 2-games, cost us third place in the standings, illustrated the folly of the Francoeur trade in his first chance for revenge, and brought everyone's spirits down in time for a 11-run waffling Friday and another series we won't win. Despite all the worthy candidates already on this fine list, this was the first loss of the year after which I said, yes, I think they're done. Pull the plug. Farmer Ted Jul 17 2009 09:47 PM They're sellers at this point. Mos def. Fman99 Aug 04 2009 08:30 PM Ha! Found it first. Pujols extra innings grand slam. Assuming the Cards hold on, 12-7. Edgy DC Aug 04 2009 08:35 PM Ugh. Premature bookage. Kong76 Aug 04 2009 08:42 PM Have to admit I went fishing for this thread too before it was over. Fman99 Aug 04 2009 08:44 PM ="Edgy DC":10jo8uvo]Ugh. Premature bookage.[/quote:10jo8uvo] Yeah, as soon as the ball left PooHoles' bat. I know, ya gotta believe, yada yada yada, but hell. Edgy DC Aug 08 2009 09:02 AM August 7: The Mets score two in the first and then go into offensive cryongeinic sleep, which is a pity because Oliver Perez turns in his best outing of the year, absoultely dominating the Padres with six innings of non-walky shutout ball. When he falters in the seventh abnd gives up half his two-run lead, Brian Stokes comes in and bails him out huge time. No matter, as Francisco Rodriguez enters in the ninth, has nothing on his fastball, and walks the leadoff batter. Ultimately, he faces five batters, retires none, and tops his appearance by giving up a game-winning grand slam to a mostly punchless shortstop scarcely out of A-ball. Chunky and grumpy ex-Met Heath Bell walks off with the win. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 08 2009 04:52 PM ="Edgy DC":2zh033cf]August 7: The Mets score two in the first and then go into offensive cryongeinic sleep, which is a pity because Oliver Perez turns in his best outing of the year, absoultely dominating the Padres with six innings of non-walky shutout ball. When he falters in the seventh abnd gives up half his two-run lead, Brian Stokes comes in and bails him out huge time. No matter, as Francisco Rodriguez enters in the ninth, has nothing on his fastball, and walks the leadoff batter. Ultimately, he faces five batters, retires none, and tops his appearance by giving up a game-winning grand slam to a mostly punchless shortstop scarcely out of A-ball. Chunky and grumpy ex-Met Heath Bell walks off with the win.[/quote:2zh033cf] Add the aspect of a blown call to let the tying run score that nobody-- save G-Fafif-- is really complaining about, since the BS felt so sickeningly inevitable anyway, and the ump didn't put the leadoff guy on or let Venable whack it, yadda yadda yadda. The 10:05 start always gives a bad west-coast loss five points extra-credit, as well. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 16 2009 11:06 AM 8/15, Giants, 5-4 (10). Let's go through the nightmare scenario checklist: Last man standing/face of franchise/best all-around player during the last four years hit in head by 94-mph fastball? Check. Ace/only Met to believe in roughed up by a free-swinging lineup Bobby Parnell shut down a day earlier? Check. Dongs for insurance and go-ahead runs hit by two players against whom said ace "sent a message?" Check. Gift of blown save (again) from Giant sorta-closer promptly returned? Check. No dropped popups, and not to the Phils/Yanks/Braves, but it's a contender. Kong76 Aug 16 2009 11:18 AM Funny, I was thinking on the subway that the only thing that didn't go wrong was Murphy and Castillo didn't hurt each other in right field on one play. Castillo was limpy for a minute but he's kinda limpy anyway. I hope they shut Wright down for the rest of the season at this point with the team's luck and track record with injuries especially ones to the coconut. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 23 2009 11:04 PM This one[/url:3q7nwdhz]'s got to go in the scrapbook, no? Demoralization early, then increasing interest with the scrapping and the Misching (even as chances get squandered), then the adrenaline rush of the 9th-inning comeback... and the car crash cardiac arrest of the close. And all against our favorite delinquents from down the 'Pike. For a game in which a literal once-in-a-lifetime play delivered the sword stroke to the shoulder blades, what's startling is how routine this feels by now. We're about one game-lost-by-catcher's-interference-followed-by-South-American-football-stadium-style-Pepsi Porch collapse from filling out the "Worst Season Ever" bingo card. metirish Aug 24 2009 07:50 AM Just me but no loss this past month and more warrants being in this thread , nothing surprises , nothing even hurts anymore......it's nothingness . G-Fafif Aug 24 2009 07:52 AM It might be more efficient to start a thread cataloguing which losses aren't the worst of 2009. Tidier anyway. metsguyinmichigan Aug 24 2009 08:04 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":7lkl3daw]This one[/url:7lkl3daw]'s got to go in the scrapbook, no? Demoralization early, then increasing interest with the scrapping and the Misching (even as chances get squandered), then the adrenaline rush of the 9th-inning comeback... and the car crash cardiac arrest of the close. And all against our favorite delinquents from down the 'Pike. For a game in which a literal once-in-a-lifetime play delivered the sword stroke to the shoulder blades, what's startling is how routine this feels by now. We're about one game-lost-by-catcher's-interference-followed-by-South-American-football-stadium-style-Pepsi Porch collapse from filling out the "Worst Season Ever" bingo card.[/quote:7lkl3daw] Brilliant! Actually, you're missing the "best player tagged in steroid scandal" box on the card, but the Yankees already filled that one in this year. Benjamin Grimm Aug 24 2009 08:09 AM ="metirish":2gf3l66x]Just me but no loss this past month and more warrants being in this thread , nothing surprises , nothing even hurts anymore......it's nothingness .[/quote:2gf3l66x] I agree. The losses are worse (and the wins are better) when the games aren't meaningless. metsmarathon Aug 24 2009 08:10 AM i'm really not sure if the circumstances surrounding last night's game warrant its inclusion in this thread. i feel its much more of a tip-your-cap kind of loss. this was a different kind of loss than the luis castillo popup. a very different animal. this was no blown save, no missed third base. if the roles had been reversed - the phils down two, two men on, no outs, top nine - they send the runners, castillo moves over to cover the bag, and gets a screaming liner hit right at him... that pops out of his glove as he prematurely looks down to step on the bag for the second out, and subsequently allows both runners to score - well, then it would belong in this thread. history jumped up and bit us on the ass. c'est la vie, i guess... LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 24 2009 09:13 AM ="metsmarathon"]i'm really not sure if the circumstances surrounding last night's game warrant its inclusion in this thread. i feel its much more of a tip-your-cap kind of loss. this was a different kind of loss than the luis castillo popup. a very different animal. this was no blown save, no missed third base. if the roles had been reversed - the phils down two, two men on, no outs, top nine - they send the runners, castillo moves over to cover the bag, and gets a screaming liner hit right at him... that pops out of his glove as he prematurely looks down to step on the bag for the second out, and subsequently allows both runners to score - well, then it would belong in this thread. history jumped up and bit us on the ass. c'est la vie, i guess... Fair point. And I'd be lying if I said this killed me as much as even the Pittsburgh game from June. These games don't sting anymore. But on a lazy Sunday, driving back from southern NJ, Howie and Whatshisface dragged me back somewhat in for a day. Plus, losing to Philly when you've got a legitimate shot at the end that didn't seem at all possible an hour earlier... doesn't it ache something fierce? (Spoiling the Phils is about the only thing I'm really hoping for, Mets-wise, for the season's remainder. Hate is all I have left.) metsmarathon Aug 24 2009 10:08 AM it does. but this is an ache i can live with - an 'oh well, you got me' kind of ache. like when your pitcher puts his pitch right were he wanted to, and the batter still manages to push a soft fly ball into short right field. you do your best, and if they beat you they beat you. its like that pitch vlad hit a week or so ago that actually bounced in front of home plate - i mean, what are you going to do there but say, "damn, he got me there"? dgwphotography Aug 24 2009 01:58 PM ="metsmarathon":1snick2b]history jumped up and bit us on the ass. [/quote:1snick2b] Your 2009 marketing slogan. Edgy DC Aug 24 2009 02:00 PM Well, something has to be 10th. metsmarathon Aug 25 2009 08:22 AM i'm gonna wander out on a limb and suggest that johan santana might well be the worst loss of 2009...

and as if blowing a second lead wasnt enough we've got the tarp coming out...

Just incase I ever need a reminder that not all stupid baserunning is done by Mets player, Crawford just got gunned out trying to steal 3rd with nobody out, Longoria at the plate, and Pena on deck.

crazy

you have an overly optimistic view of these matchups, i like it!

="Gwreck":2thm7pfz]How does a person outside of the NY Metro Area obtain the ability to watch every single Mets game on television? Is it even possible?[/quote:2thm7pfz] there is an "MLB package" that gives you all the games everywhere, i dont know which cable providers have it though. Gwreck Jun 18 2009 12:40 AM Yeah, I know. It's called "Extra Innings." I think the Satellite companies have them. Maybe I need to be more specific. What does one need to do so that they can get *every* (yes, *every* game) on TV, even if outside the NY Metro area? Presumably the Saturday games would be the trickiest with the Fox rules. Kong76 Jun 18 2009 05:30 AM I have the MLB package on Cablevision, there are no games on that on Saturdays until 7 EST. I don't know if there's a clear answer to the question, but if I lived in Alabama I'd try and get satellite service that at the very least had SNY and WPIX or whatever it's called these days for starters. Unless some satellite services give multiple ESPN and FOX feeds over the weekend one might still not get a few Mets games? Benjamin Grimm Jun 18 2009 05:33 AM Wow, you must be some kind of masochist. Anyway, one thing you could do is set up a friend who lives in New York (and has SNY) with a Slingbox. (You might have to also set them up with a dedicated television, too, otherwise they wouldn't be able to watch what they want while your Sling had the TV set to the Mets. I'm not sure if it works that way, though.) Farmer Ted Jun 18 2009 09:25 AM I'm getting DirecTV installed today, as a matter fo fact. I signed up for the sports pack whcih includes 35 or so sports networks including SNY, YES, MSG, MSG+, ESPNU, etc. Benjamin Grimm Jun 18 2009 09:30 AM I have that. I really only watch the Mets stuff, but it's interesting to know that I can watch just about any game I want on any given day. (Except if it involves the Phillies, due to local blackout rules.) Hawkeye57 Jun 18 2009 01:04 PM I live in Buffalo and I know all of the game are available from SNY on basic cable. I have Digital and I get SNY and SNY HD. I am happy it switched from the NFL Network. I also get the HD channel. And it isn't bad quality picture either. I don't have the sports package, but I get the YES Network, YES HD and MSG. metirish Jun 18 2009 02:40 PM Mlb starting today will be streaming games live on the iPhone app , best app going IMO....love it and this just makes it better.....for the iPod touch too..... Gwreck Jun 23 2009 03:31 PM Let me throw this out there again. If you can help, it's much appreciated. [u:42gm04d8]What I've pieced together is:[/u:42gm04d8] As long as one has Extra Innings, they will get all M-F games and Sunday afternoon games. Sunday evening games are ESPN (national exclusive), so one would get those no matter where they live. The only true blackout issue would be for Saturday games. Games at 7:00 PM EDT or later are on Extra Innings, but anything before (even at 1:10 PM EDT start) are blacked out. [u:42gm04d8]The Questions:[/u:42gm04d8] If one lives outside of the Mets' market -- is it possible to watch those Saturday afternoon games? The two potential examples are: 1. Game starts at 1:10 PM and is on SNY or CW11. Blacked out on extra innings. Is it possible to get a satellite feed of the CW11 if you live outside of New York? 2. Can one get multiple FOX feeds via satellite? If FOX is carrying more than one game , the affiliates will show a game based on the teams playing. Can you get more than one affiliate on a satellite? (ie. if your local Fox affiliate is showing Oakland-Angels, could you get the Mets-Phillies feed from an East coast Fox affiliate?) 3. Are there any ways of doing this that I'm not thinking of? Spacemans Bong Jun 23 2009 03:34 PM In short: No. Fox demands, and gets, exclusivity. Benjamin Grimm Jun 23 2009 03:36 PM There are three ways I can think of to get the games that air on WPIX. With Extra Innings you can usually watch the opposing team's feed, unless it's Saturday afternoon or neither team is carrying the game on cable. (Although Extra Innings does carry some over-the-air broadcasts, but just not for the Mets.) As I mentioned above, you can get a Slingbox and install it at a friend's or relative's house in the New York area. Thirdly, if you're close to New York but just outside the area, you might be able to pick up the WPIX signal with a strong HDTV antenna. I checked into it, and I'm kind of on the fringe area, I may or may not be able to pick up PIX. I may try it some day, but not any time soon. TransMonk Jun 23 2009 03:42 PM I have MLB.TV and if I want Saturday afternoon Mets, it's all radio (which is free with the subscription)...unless it happens to be the national FOX game and I don't get a regional game. Typically where I am, I'll get Cubs, Brewers, White Sox, Twins or Cardinals. I did get one Mets game earlier this season (San Fran maybe?), but it's pretty rare. Gwreck Jun 23 2009 04:52 PM I guess this is what people talk about with regard to the stupidity of blackout restrictions. I can see no logical reason why a game airing outside the Fox window (ie. 1:10 PM EDT start) would need to be blacked out. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 23 2009 07:28 PM ="Gwreck":opssat3o]I guess this is what people talk about with regard to the stupidity of blackout restrictions. I can see no logical reason why a game airing outside the Fox window (ie. 1:10 PM EDT start) would need to be blacked out.[/quote:opssat3o] Point of clarification: the Fox window runs from Saturday morning through 7 pm EST-- the 1:10 start would fall smack in the middle of that. And you WOULD get those games on EI-- just not live. Gwreck Jun 23 2009 07:57 PM If the Mets are playing at 1:10 PM and are on CW11 or SNY, you see the games in New York. It's not an exclusive window, it just blacks out Extra Innings if the game is at that time. Fman99 Jun 23 2009 08:48 PM I am lucky in that my local cable provider pipes in the CW11/WPIX games (not in HD but that's OK) on an empty channel so that I don't miss any Mets games at all. This is in addition to getting SNY and SNY HD. (Time Warner, Syracuse area) Hawkeye57 Jun 24 2009 08:28 AM ="Gwreck":3dwchnky][u:3dwchnky]The Questions:[/u:3dwchnky] If one lives outside of the Mets' market -- is it possible to watch those Saturday afternoon games? The two potential examples are: 1. Game starts at 1:10 PM and is on SNY or CW11. Blacked out on extra innings. Is it possible to get a satellite feed of the CW11 if you live outside of New York? 2. Can one get multiple FOX feeds via satellite? If FOX is carrying more than one game , the affiliates will show a game based on the teams playing. Can you get more than one affiliate on a satellite? (ie. if your local Fox affiliate is showing Oakland-Angels, could you get the Mets-Phillies feed from an East coast Fox affiliate?) 3. Are there any ways of doing this that I'm not thinking of?[/quote:3dwchnky] Remember, I am in Buffalo. 1. Most of the time. I've only missed one Saturday afternoon game here in Buffalo. I don't get PIX, they play those games on TWCS. I do get CW. The station does not cut out during extras. 2. I get three different FOX stations, I have regular FOX, FOX Sports and FOX Northeast. I don't get the Mets games on Northeast. Number 6 Jun 24 2009 11:03 AM The Yankees just became[/url:1vazfd93] the first club to offer their games online in-market. My first question upon hearing this was "what about the cable companies? Won't they go ape-poop?" The answer, of course, is that it's only available to Cablevision subscribers, and the Vision predictably gets a cut. soupcan Jun 24 2009 11:22 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":3o1m20b1]As I mentioned above, you can get a Slingbox and install it at a friend's or relative's house in the New York area.[/quote:3o1m20b1] Slingbox is how I watch the gay dames during the week when I'm at work. My bro-in-law has one and I just log into it from the office as I have no TV here. I've also used his slingbox via my laptop from Caifornia to watch the Metskis. Benjamin Grimm Jun 24 2009 11:26 AM ="soupcan":3cx58r9v]="Benjamin Grimm":3cx58r9v]As I mentioned above, you can get a Slingbox and install it at a friend's or relative's house in the New York area.[/quote:3cx58r9v] Slingbox is how I watch the gay dames during the week when I'm at work. My bro-in-law has one and I just log into it from the office as I have no TV here. I've also used his slingbox via my laptop from Caifornia to watch the Metskis.[/quote:3cx58r9v] Does it use the same tuner that the TV is tuned into? In other words, if you're in California and you tell your laptop that you want to watch the Mets, does your brother-in-law's TV change channels? If so, I can see that getting annoying if he or his family is watching something else and the channel suddenly changes. Fman99 Jun 24 2009 11:31 AM ="soupcan":2yrm7wxc]="Benjamin Grimm":2yrm7wxc]As I mentioned above, you can get a Slingbox and install it at a friend's or relative's house in the New York area.[/quote:2yrm7wxc] Slingbox is how I watch the gay dames during the week when I'm at work. My bro-in-law has one and I just log into it from the office as I have no TV here. I've also used his slingbox via my laptop from Caifornia to watch the Metskis.[/quote:2yrm7wxc] I am considering getting a slingbox for this kind of thing. Woot is selling them today in fact for $100 (refurbs). soupcan Jun 24 2009 11:37 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":15awrxrn]Does it use the same tuner that the TV is tuned into? In other words, if you're in California and you tell your laptop that you want to watch the Mets, does your brother-in-law's TV change channels? If so, I can see that getting annoying if he or his family is watching something else and the channel suddenly changes.[/quote:15awrxrn] He has one TV dedicated to the slingbox that nobody watches, so its not a problem. Benjamin Grimm Jun 24 2009 12:32 PM That's kinda how I thought it would work. Interesting. soupcan Jun 24 2009 12:44 PM But yeah, it would use the same tuner so if I would change the channel from my PC it would change on the physical TV in his house and if someone in the house used the cable remote to change the channel back, it would change back on my end too. Benjamin Grimm Jun 24 2009 12:53 PM So that's the answer. Find somebody in New York who's willing to dedicate a spare TV to a SlingBox. If that person also has SNY, you'd be able to watch every Mets game as if you were in New York, without even needing Extra Innings. Gwreck Jun 24 2009 12:59 PM Yep. The Slingbox was a great idea. I believe the way the Slingbox changes channels is that it has a small infared-emitting device which you just stick in front of the cable box and can be used to change channels/etc. I guess it would also work to control a DVR if you taped the game and then wanted to watch it later. Swan Swan H Jun 24 2009 01:15 PM Yup. You get full control of the remote that works with the box, so if the box has a DVR you can use it as well. It's a GUI image of the remote, which is a bit weird, but works great. We got one last year when our son headed up to Boston for an internship, and this has allowed him to watch the Rangers, Giants and Mets, and record games when he had to work at night. Last time we went up to visit he had one of the Music Choice channels playing through the Slingbox on his laptop. He said it was better than the radio, since there were no commercials. bmfc1 Jun 28 2009 12:05 PM Gwreck, The rules are stupid. Las Vegas baseball fans are blackout out of six different teams! I have both EI and mlb.tv. If I could only pick one, I'd pick mlb.tv because you get the Mets games on WPIX. EI only shows the cable games. This includes the Saturday 1:10 starts which are n/a on EI. (This is one of the two dumbest aspects of the blackout rules--the other is that FOX games that are not shown in your market are still not shown on EI or mlb.tv).

Pelf gets out of the jam! I thought only the Mets could strand them loaded!

what'd i miss? its on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o2lJ19qML0

i got the impression that he knew scotty was there and went looking for him, but even if he just knew of the base my point still stands, that he "waited" for kirk despite having no reason to wait for kirk or anyone else for that matter.

David Wright, btw, second in the league in STEALS and first in OBP, maybe HE should be batting 1st/2nd. I'd bat him 3rd personally.

]No chance the Sox deal him though -- he's too steady as an insurance policy in the event that someone gets hurt Beckett Matsuzaka Lester Wakefield Smoltz Bucholtz Masterson they don't need Penny. Bucholtz is tearing up AAA and has already pitched in the majors last year, i'm sure they be happy if someone wants Penny's salary because they'd STILL have the deepest starting pitching in the majors.

hey, you rarely want your guys to get hurt (the exception would be where the injury forces an idiot manager to replace the injured player with a better player who should have started in the first place), but perez has been a disaster and theres no reason to believe he'd be helping right now. Lets ask Boston if they'd take a C prospect for Penny if we agree to pay the whole salary, remind them that he'd face the Yankees and maybe help them out.

most importantly, there was nothing that necessarily troubled me. 1. Nimoy (i'll use the actor's name to avoid confusion about which Spock i'm talking about) travels back in time 2. Nimoy is exiled to a remote planet by Nero 3. Nimoy somehow knows that Scotty is on that planet at the time and where 4. Despite this knowledge, Nimoy hangs out in a cave for awhile 5. Kirk is exiled to the planet as well 6. Nimoy magically finds Kirk, who he had no way to know or even reason to suspect was coming Since there was no way that Nimoy could know Kirk wascoming, why the heck was he hanging out in some cold cave if he already knew where to find Scotty?

="metirish":367jekyr]="John Cougar Lunchbucket":367jekyr]By the Mets' recent standards this move was lightning quick. Perhaps now the mediots won't walk around pretending its a good thing that Oliver Perez is out.[/quote:367jekyr] Good point , any news on Ollie?[/quote:367jekyr] Some news on "ollie": 1. he isn't very good. 2. he's way overpaid. 3. don't you wish the Mets had ponied up for Lowe? i'd call it 20/20 hindsight but who was actually happy to have Mr. Walk back on the staff? LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 12 2009 07:50 AM ="Nymr83":2nbhpnzk] Some news on "ollie": 1. he isn't very good. 2. he's way overpaid. 3. don't you wish the Mets had ponied up for Lowe? i'd call it 20/20 hindsight but who was actually happy to have Mr. Walk back on the staff?[/quote:2nbhpnzk] 1. No, he's not. 2. Yes, he is. 3. Kinda. But yeah, he's ours, and at this sad-panda moment he'd be another option alongside Messrs. Figs, Niese, and Nieve. metirish Jun 12 2009 07:51 AM I still have faith in Oliver Perez , yes I do. Nymr83 Jun 12 2009 07:54 AM hey, you rarely want your guys to get hurt (the exception would be where the injury forces an idiot manager to replace the injured player with a better player who should have started in the first place), but perez has been a disaster and theres no reason to believe he'd be helping right now. Lets ask Boston if they'd take a C prospect for Penny if we agree to pay the whole salary, remind them that he'd face the Yankees and maybe help them out. Edgy DC Jun 12 2009 08:30 AM There's every reason to believe a healthy Oliver Perez would be an asset right now, and no, there's no reason to wish injury. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 12 2009 08:32 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":1zbscc1y]="Nymr83":1zbscc1y] Some news on "ollie": 1. he isn't very good. 2. he's way overpaid. 3. don't you wish the Mets had ponied up for Lowe? i'd call it 20/20 hindsight but who was actually happy to have Mr. Walk back on the staff?[/quote:1zbscc1y] 1. No, he's not. 2. Yes, he is. 3. Kinda.[/quote:1zbscc1y] 1. Real insightful. He's a league average ERA guy with strikeout stuff (and for what it's worth a terrific record vs. the Yankees), still relatively young. Are we pretending that's not useful? 2. How is this even relevant but to fuel ignoramuses with agendas? 3. Just as irrelevant. Edgy DC Jun 12 2009 08:33 AM I thik it's ignorami. (Gotta keep the pedant flag flying.) Edgy DC Jun 12 2009 08:40 AM And I stand by my position on Lowe. Right now, he's dirty water under a rusty bridge. Feh. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 12 2009 08:49 AM Is it agendi too? LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 12 2009 09:05 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]="Nymr83"] Some news on "ollie": 1. he isn't very good. 2. he's way overpaid. 3. don't you wish the Mets had ponied up for Lowe? i'd call it 20/20 hindsight but who was actually happy to have Mr. Walk back on the staff? 1. No, he's not. 2. Yes, he is. 3. Kinda. 1. Real insightful. He's a league average ERA guy with strikeout stuff (and for what it's worth a terrific record vs. the Yankees), still relatively young. Are we pretending that's not useful? 2. How is this even relevant but to fuel ignoramuses with agendas? 3. Just as irrelevant. Behind the 1. A little more 'conceding-the-point' than true-belief here... but yeah, I'm kind of there, now. FIP and BABIP stuffs during the more-good-Ollie-than-bad-Ollie years have kinda been pointing the way toward an Ollie relapse for a while now. Behind the 2. It's not relevant at all in-season, unless we're talking trade. (Another more-concession-than-agreement, truth-be-told.) Behind the 3. Very, very true. But if we'd drafted Reggie... WHOLE new ballgame. And, actually, agenda is plural (agendum). Fman99 Jun 12 2009 09:08 AM ="Nymr83":35sdfmcj]hey, you rarely want your guys to get hurt (the exception would be where the injury forces an idiot manager to replace the injured player with a better player who should have started in the first place), but perez has been a disaster and theres no reason to believe he'd be helping right now. Lets ask Boston if they'd take a C prospect for Penny if we agree to pay the whole salary, remind them that he'd face the Yankees and maybe help them out.[/quote:35sdfmcj] Penny griping today that he doesn't want to be sent to the pen, which is looking more likely as Smoltzie gets ready to return to major league baseball. No chance the Sox deal him though -- he's too steady as an insurance policy in the event that someone gets hurt (Dice-K again, or Smoltz showing his age, etc.). Edgy DC Jun 12 2009 09:14 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]Is it agendi too? Agenda actually is a plural latin word (s. agendum), but we use it as a singular, so agendas is fine. Agendae works, but isn't particularly any more correct. Nymr83 Jun 12 2009 09:19 AM ]No chance the Sox deal him though -- he's too steady as an insurance policy in the event that someone gets hurt Beckett Matsuzaka Lester Wakefield Smoltz Bucholtz Masterson they don't need Penny. Bucholtz is tearing up AAA and has already pitched in the majors last year, i'm sure they be happy if someone wants Penny's salary because they'd STILL have the deepest starting pitching in the majors. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 12 2009 09:35 AM ="Nymr83"]]No chance the Sox deal him though -- he's too steady as an insurance policy in the event that someone gets hurt Beckett Matsuzaka Lester Wakefield Smoltz Bucholtz Masterson they don't need Penny. Bucholtz is tearing up AAA and has already pitched in the majors last year, i'm sure they be happy if someone wants Penny's salary because they'd STILL have the deepest starting pitching in the majors. Well, yeah. But they'd still rather have an unhappy camper in the pen-- provided he's not throwing things and revealing secret handshakes to the media-- than give away a trade asset. There's practically no chance-- given their recent trade history-- that the Beanies make a strict dump trade. metirish Jun 12 2009 09:43 AM " you can never have enough pitching" From page 1 of the imaginary book on baseball , revised edition , last updated by some GM somewhere..

]As my high school principal used to say, you can't polish a turd. i believe they tested that theory on Mythbusters!

[url:3mr7km2p]http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4250726[/url:3mr7km2p]

Hawkeye has 250 posts and I've never seen him before??

]The guy is a college pitcher. oh. whoops. yeah i guess its time to gain weight

]854, Brian Needham, RHP, Lamar U., Texas, 6-7, 180 check out the height & weight on that last guy i'm not too suprised, I was probably about 180-190 when i was a junior or senior in high school and he's only got two inches on me.