nymr83

hmm ok, well in any case he wont be getting in. the real test cases for the steroid era will be Bonds and Clemens though, because both would get 95%+ of the vote absent steroids

="Benjamin Grimm":ips0smpy]Bill Veeck tried something like that in the minor leagues. He had a chain link fence installed on a track on top of the regular fence. When the home team was batting, the fence would be rolled off to the side, and when the visitors were up it would be rolled back into place. Needless to say, he didn't get away with that for long.[/quote:ips0smpy] yeah, but that leads to a better idea that you might get away with... having a higher "portable" fence in games started by your flyball pitchers than you do in games started by your groundballers. Gwreck Jan 12 2009 06:12 PM ="Nymr83":1gekmyvr]yeah, but that leads to a better idea that you might get away with... having a higher "portable" fence in games started by your flyball pitchers than you do in games started by your groundballers.[/quote:1gekmyvr] I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think that's actually prohibited. Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 08:02 PM Yes it is. Teams need league permission before changing ballpark dimiensions, and I'm certain they'd be intolerant of a team changing them daily on the basis of who is pitching.. Nymr83 Jan 12 2009 08:47 PM is the height of a wall included in dimensions though? or are "dimensions" just the distance from homeplate to the wall? Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 09:00 PM I guess it's a valid question, but I consider the z axis to be a dimension. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 12 2009 09:39 PM I am sure that changing fence heights would require prior league approval. Frayed Knot Jan 13 2009 06:16 AM Yeah, something like that would almost certainly be done between seasons and only after notifying MLB and probably after waiting for permission. All Jeffy said was the OF was designed with the possibility of fine-tuning the wall height in mind (and maybe even small changes in distances in some spots) so that if minor adjustments were needed it wouldn't mean tearing out certain seats and blocking the views of others if the place started to look too hitter-friendly (or, presumably, too pitcher-friendly). MFS62 Jan 13 2009 06:46 AM Discussion about whether or not CitiField will be a launching pad is premature because the wind currents when Shea is down are not known yet. Later Nymr83 Jan 13 2009 07:18 AM but isn't shea basically behind homeplate which is closed off anyway? i'd only expect shea to significantly effect the winds there if shea was facing an open part of stadium. i have no proof of this, but i got the feeling every game i went to this year that citifield was having a huge effect on the winds inside shea Centerfield Jan 13 2009 07:54 AM Back to the original topic. Heyman has the Braves going 4 years, close to $60 million for Lowe. Vince Coleman Firecracker Jan 13 2009 08:05 AM ="Centerfield":3os7gt8v]Back to the original topic. Heyman has the Braves going 4 years, close to $60 million for Lowe.[/quote:3os7gt8v] Gak! Where's Ben Sheets? metirish Jan 13 2009 08:07 AM In that same Heyman article he says the Mets are proposing a three year $30 million deal for Ollie , I don't see that getting it done. seawolf17 Jan 13 2009 09:24 AM Lowe's a Brave: http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/braves/stories/2009/01/13/braves_lowe.html Edgy DC Jan 13 2009 09:25 AM Welcome back, Ollie! Benjamin Grimm Jan 13 2009 09:27 AM Yuck. seawolf17 Jan 13 2009 09:29 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":26lhjjuj]Yuck.[/quote:26lhjjuj] No, I'm okay with that: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=270719119 bmfc1 Jan 13 2009 09:36 AM Heyman seems to be the first to report any news about Boras's clients. Peter Gammons, on January 07, said: "A lot of general managers and those of us in the business kid about a couple of sites referred to as ScottBoras.com, and Scott will float things out there and throw it out there and people will report it...." http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/01/gammonss_take.html I wonder if he was referring to Heyman. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 13 2009 09:37 AM For an xtra year and an xtra 24 million they can have him. Now let's get Ollie. metirish Jan 13 2009 09:40 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3qgkl57i]For an xtra year and an xtra 24 million they can have him. Now let's get Ollie.[/quote:3qgkl57i] Exactly , the four years is bad but they also seemed to have blown the door open with the $60 million , who did they think they were competing with? attgig Jan 13 2009 09:49 AM ="metirish":27ncuko8]="John Cougar Lunchbucket":27ncuko8]For an xtra year and an xtra 24 million they can have him. Now let's get Ollie.[/quote:27ncuko8] Exactly , the four years is bad but they also seemed to have blown the door open with the $60 million , who did they think they were competing with?[/quote:27ncuko8] a mystery team. who else? Fman99 Jan 13 2009 09:52 AM Good. Way too much money/years for a guy who is 36 and has his head screwed on sideways. I like Sheets or Ollie at this point as a #4 guy. Benjamin Grimm Jan 13 2009 09:58 AM I really wanted them to get someone better than Oliver Perez. I wanted a number 2 guy. Oh well. I would have been more optimistic heading into the season with Lowe than Perez. At least Redding should be an upgrade over Pedro. metsguyinmichigan Jan 13 2009 10:02 AM I'm very OK with this. That deal is going to look horrible before too long. Ollie can be lights out. He'll probably toss our first no-hitter. A seven-walk, two hit-batsman no-hitter, granted. smg58 Jan 13 2009 11:08 AM ="smg58":3cvsi3pd]A month or so ago I thought Derek Lowe would present the best value of the free agent pitchers. But I hear more rumors about teams being interested in him than in anybody else. I no longer think he'll come that cheap. He's more consistent and durable than any other pitcher on the market besides CC, but at his age I wouldn't want to be the team that offers him a fourth year at $15M+ per.[/quote:3cvsi3pd] I said that on Nov. 5, and I'm sticking to it. A Boy Named Seo Jan 13 2009 11:13 AM Good job, Mets. I don't doubt Lowe woulda been fine this year, maybe better than Ollie, and maybe good next year, too. But they weren't gonna go four expensive years on a 36-year old guy period, and they stuck to that. MFS62 Jan 13 2009 11:42 AM From age 37-40, Curt Schilling went sometning like 51-24, with ERA+ from 80 (one year) to 150 (best during that span). Not saying Lowe can come close to that, but it can happen. Of course there are probably many examples of rapid declines, too. But Lowe reminds me of Schilling - a bulldog. I wanted him on the Mets. Later Frayed Knot Jan 13 2009 01:21 PM ="batmagadanleadoff":r9o9y1ku]I'll say this for Heyman in fairness -- like him or not (and I'm not sure where I stand) last season, he was by far, the most accurate reporter at predicting future Mets moves ... especially during the will-they-fire-Willie and when-will-they-fire-Willie phase of the 2008 season.[/quote:r9o9y1ku] Heyman has long been a first-rate baseball reporter as far as digging out the facts and getting them right more often than not and often getting them first. And he didn't always get the credit for his scoops due to the tendency of the national press to cite the big-city dailies while overlooking Heyman's suburban-based Newsday. It may have been those frequent slights that prompted him to leave the newspaper biz for the brighter lights of SI, WFAN, SNY, and now MLBTV. Heyman's columnist persona while he was still at Newsday tended to irk a few around here from time to time but that was usually separate from his regular reporter chores. Nymr83 Jan 13 2009 01:30 PM too much and too long for Lowe, i'm glad it wasn't us.

I'm shocked that Raines' total was so low. Iguess his candidacy will be a long and grinding one like Blyleven's and Rice's have been. McGwire lost 10 votes from last year, but you really have to look at it as a bigger loss than that because last year was his first on the ballot, so its not like he had a bunch of guys saying "i wont first ballot him but i like him in." Tommy John was the biggest guy in his last year of eligibility, he didn't even come close (which is fine.) I guess if Blyleven wants to get in he has to un-retire and play for some teams that will give him more support, or he can assasinate those voters still stupid enough to think W's are a meaningful statistic for an individual. Why is Trammell continuosly ignored?

Out Of The Park baseball [url:2g3as8ok]http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/[/url:2g3as8ok]

Redding is a nice guy to have on your AAA club for when you need an injury replacement or in case your #5 starter rookie flames out (Niese) but i wouldn't count on him to pitch the way he did the 2nd half of this past year.

="seawolf17":y1gn0wm9]I love OOTP.[/quote:y1gn0wm9] i thought i had found a great online league but hte drama on their forums the lat few days has been disgusting, i'm not sure how much longer i'm sticking around seawolf17 Jan 10 2009 05:00 PM I'm such a total OOTP dork. I'm actually still playing OOTP6; I never upgraded. I'm in the middle of the 2024 season with my fake Mets. Reyes retired in 2021 with 2587 hits, 140 HR, 962 SB. Wright retired in 2022 with 2704 hits, 416 HR. Had a dynamic 2013 (.363/.442/.727, 49 HR, 157 RBI). Had the cojones to test free agency after the 2015 season, signing with the Cardinals, but I threw two top prospects at them and reacquired him during spring training. Yusmeiro Petit (remember him?) retired after the 2023 season, a five-time Cy Young winner and lifetime Met with a career 2.91 ERA. (It actually should have been lower if he retired earlier; from 2020-2022 he really fell off the table.) Edgy DC Jan 10 2009 09:15 PM I hesitate to ask, but how many championships have you brought home for us? Benjamin Grimm Jan 11 2009 06:49 AM I don't know that I've ever heard of OOTP. What does the acronym stand for? Nymr83 Jan 11 2009 06:55 AM Out Of The Park baseball [url:2g3as8ok]http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/[/url:2g3as8ok] seawolf17 Jan 11 2009 01:49 PM ="Edgy DC":q9q9bdgh]I hesitate to ask, but how many championships have you brought home for us?[/quote:q9q9bdgh] More than probably realistically possible. Nine, including four straight from 2007-2010. Edgy DC Jan 11 2009 02:35 PM Nine in 16 years? Totally possible, especially with the way you ripped off the Cards. seawolf17 Jan 11 2009 03:41 PM No, nine in eighteen (2005-2023). In defense of the Cardinals, the two guys they got were an eight-time All-Star in the prime of his career (who, like Wright, retired and was selected to the Hall of Fame) and a thumper who became the top catcher in the league, leading the Cards to two titles of their own (including last season). TheOldMole Jan 12 2009 08:11 AM I've been replaying the 1948 season on Diamond Mind. I did the 1947 season, and the Giants, with their incredible home run power, beat out the Dodgers for the NL pennant -- outside of Branca, the Dodgers' pitching really fell apart. The Giants also outslugged the Yankees in the World Series. 1948 is an interesting year for a Dodger fan, because most of the ingredients for their great teams were there, but not quite in place yet. Carl Furillo is their regular center fielder. Duke Snider comes up in midseason, but doesn't win an everyday spot. Billy Cox starts more games at third than anyone else, but that means only 70 games. It's a revolving door, with Spider Jorgensen nearing the end of his career, but still hanging in, Tommy Brown getting one of several shots to win a regular position, Eddie Miksis getting a bunch or starts. Gil Hodges becomes pretty much a regular at first, but still catches a few games -- they haven't entirely given up on their 1847 lineup of Hodges catching and Robinson at first. Preston Ward actually starts the season as the regular first baseman. Campanella shares catching duties with Hodges, but mostly with Bruce Edwards, who also plays third, outfield, and even fills in a couple of times at first. Robinson is pretty much the everyday second baseman, with Miksis his main replacement, and Reese is the one day in, day out player. The outfield is in a huge state of flux, with aging veteran Arky Vaughan and prematurely aging veteran Pete Reiser still around. Gene Hermanski in left is actually their closest thing to an everyday player, and he stays around for a while. My Dodger fandom began in 1950, and fanaticism in 1951, so Hermanski is the first left fielder i remember -- he went in mid-'51 in the Andy Pafko deal. Their closest thing to a third regular outfielder is Marv Rackley, with both George Shuba and Dick Whitman getting more playing time than Snider. They will try to get rid of Rackley in May of 1948, trading him to the Pirates for Johnny Hopp, but the deal is voided three weeks later and the players returned toi their respective teams. I wonder that that was about? The Dodgers do get rid of Rackley after the 1949 season, selling him to the Cincinnati Reds for sixty bucks, and one has to wonder how they arrived at that figure. But by 1949, the Dodger everyday lineup is set. Pitching - they don't have Newcombe yet. Rex Barney is actually their ace. Branca's in the regular rotation, as is Preacher Roe. Erskine a spot starter/reliever. Edgy DC Jan 27 2009 11:20 AM 'Wolf, I meant to ask. Did we ever get a no-hitter? MFS62 Jan 27 2009 11:56 AM Mole, that was a year or two before I really started rooting for Brooklyn. But until the team moved after the 1957 season, third base was always a weak link for them. Cox was there for several more years, then gave way to Don Hoak. Travis Jackson played there for a year or two and IIRC Jackie Robinson and Pee Wee Reese even played the most games there for a year or two. Thanks for the memories. Later seawolf17 Jan 27 2009 12:23 PM Two, actually: 8/26/2006, Pedro Martinez (NYM), 4 K, 1 BB against the Reds 8/29/2009, Jake Peavy (NYM), 8 K, 7 BB against the Astros I signed Peavy as a FA after the 2007 season; he pitched eleven and a half seasons, winning a Cy Young in 2009 (20-6, 2.70, 235 Ks in 220 IP) before falling apart in 2019. The Yankees claimed him off waivers, but he was awful that season (2-8, 6.39 in 18 starts). I signed him that offseason to a minor league deal, but the magic was gone, and I released him in June after he started the season 2-8, 8.94 in AAA. Edgy DC Jan 27 2009 01:33 PM I'd figure the first one would have stopped time or something. Methead Jan 27 2009 03:45 PM I'm so addicted to Puresim Baseball it's not even funny. I use fictional players though, so I don't really have any fun Mets parallels I can make. Edgy DC Feb 09 2009 05:56 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 09 2009 08:10 PM OK, so I get my 1969 Mets ridiculously hot in the NL division of my League of Champions, leading by as many as three games in early September of the 154-game schedule. But I've over-used both my sluggers and my relievers, and they trudge through September with the swooning offensed of the Valentine era Mets and the swooning pen of the Randolph era variety. The 1964 St. Louis Cardinals catch and pass them by a game. My desperate strategy is to try and coax long workdays out of my starting pitchers and to run Boswell and Gaspar crazy. If a Shamsky gets on in a game situation, damn it, pinch run Amos Otis, we've got a division to win. And, for a few games anyhow, it works. I go into the final game up one over the Cards. But I'm up against my old nemesis, the 1934 Tigers --- sluggers through the lineup, and iron man starters that are hard to chase. I start Tom Seaver on three days rest, looking for the clincher. But the offense is blowing chunks against Schoolboy Rowe. Through eight innings, the 1969ers have four hits and no runs. The visiting Tiggs, meanwhile had broken through for a pair of runs in the seventh --- with some poor defensive choices by this manager probably helping them along. In a desperate attempt to generate something, I pinch-hit Gaspar and Martin in the eighth, and come up bone-dry. So, this is what my lineup looks like in the ninth. Boswell, 2b Harrelson, ss Jones, lf Shamsky, rf Agee, cf Kranepool, 1b Grote, c Gaspar, ph Charles, 3b Garrett, 3b Martin, ph, c SeaverSeaver leading off. Rowe is about at 100 pitches. What's my move in the ninth? My bench looks like this LRCollinsClendenon Dyer Otis Pfiel Swoboda Weis How should I play it in the ninth. MFS62 Feb 09 2009 06:20 PM Rowe was a righty, and looking at his records, 100 pitches doesn't seem a lot. They'll probably keep him in no matter what. They only had two lefties on that team, one starter and one reliever, who don't look that impressive. So Garrett might be an option. I'd pinch hit with the guy who had the magic in 1969 - Weis. He's the most likely of your remaining hitters to get on base. Then, you have a lefty and a switch hitter coming up, at least one who can bunt for a hit- Buddy. Then you have a good contact hitter, Jones and another lefty - Shamsky. If it comes down to Art with runners on and two out, looking out at the bullpen, Clendennon would be my choice if they bring in one of the lefties. Go get 'em tiger (no pun intended) Later Edgy DC Feb 09 2009 08:23 PM So that's one vote to pinch hit with Weis. It's a good thing you didn't stick with your original choice for Garrett, as he has already been pinch hit for the previous inning and was out of the game. And batting out of turn is an automatic out. MFS62 Feb 09 2009 09:26 PM I saw Collins and thought Garrett. My bad. But the strategy with either of them is still the same. Later John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 10 2009 05:34 AM Don't know what Otis or Dyer will get you right now. Why not go with Swo. Worst case, he whiffs and you went down giving it a shot. Best case he cuts the deficit in half. And he prolly reaches at at least the rate of the others. Then take it from there. Edgy DC Feb 10 2009 06:09 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 10 2009 07:19 AM My thinking was built around Harrelson. He, of course, has no power, but also didn't have a particularly good year (even for him) as a hitter for average) or bunter or base stealer that year. He was also subject to overuse. If I got a guy or two on, was I going to pinch-hit for the punchless Buddy? If so, I had to save Clendenon for that. The whole meatball was on the line here. I looked Buddy in the eye and went with my gut, trusting in his walkiness and his switch-hitterness. That left me to use Clendenon not for his primary skill, but for a secondary one --- getting on base, and being a good enough runner not to clog the tying run behind him. And my hope wasn't for naught. On the fifth pitch, with a 2-2 count. Clendenon singles up the middle. The lineup turns over, and I have two good left-righty matchups coming. Boswell --- again on pitch five with a 2-2 count --- pulls one through the hole. Donn stops at second, and I have the tying run on first. Manager Mickey Cochrane goes to the pen and out comes righthander Roxie Lawson '35. out of Iowa Wesleyan College. What say? Tying runs on. Do I stick with Buddy? John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 10 2009 07:08 AM He's got too much speed to be a triple play candidate. And you know Gil would have him bunting. F it. If you're gonna put a guy 2nd in the batting order only to wuss out with the game on the line then you're making at least one mistake. I say let Bud bat and swing away. Edgy DC Feb 10 2009 07:24 AM Good call! And bunting is for loosers! On a 2-1 pitch, Bud Harrelson '69 doubles off the of the base of the wall in the left field corner! Clendenon '69 tears around third and scores standing up. Boswell '69, though a Very Good (rated) basestealer, is merely an Average (rated) baserunner. Confronted with Goose Goslin '35's Average (rated) throwing arm, do I send Boswell? Frayed Knot Feb 10 2009 07:26 AM With no outs?!? ... Hell no!! - particularly on a ball in the corner where it'll be a shorter throw/relay. Edgy DC Feb 10 2009 07:46 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 10 2009 08:10 AM Amen. So I get really nervous --- remember my inability to score the tying run from third with no outs earlier in this thread --- even with the heart of the order coming up. I pinch-run Amos Otis (rated Excellent as a runner) for Boswell. If I tie it up and don't win it, I still have infielders Collins and Weis and Pfiel on the bench. But I feel like I'm being a real wimp, playing for the tie at home. The tying and winning runs on, they want little to do with Jones '69, and they pitch around him. I let him swing the bat, but he doesn't see anything he likes, and walks on four pitches. Did somebody say pinch-hit for Shamsky? Hell no! Are you a plant from his ex-wife? He's a .300 hitter with power and my cleanup hitter. He, too, walks, bringing home the tying run, the easiest act of heroism in Amos Otis' career. Up steps Agee, he rips the third pitch through the hole on the left side, and pandemonium begins. MFS62 Feb 10 2009 08:00 AM Way to go! Edgy - our own John McGraw. Later

since we needed the pitching

"...and on your right you'll see the private suite we reserve for players' agents, but only if their clients have signed with us..."

he doesn't count, he read the hit-piece that looks like it came straight from the wife's divorce lawyer. ok, maybe he's a dick, but he pitches well and doesn't look like a distraction on the field (Ramirez-style) so whatever. the Mets need pitching, even pitching with flawed personal lives.

="Edgy DC":er6x240t]And Lowe is old and fat and pretty dicky. Nobody's perfect.[/quote:er6x240t] he's old and relatively fat, but he was good the last 3 years in LA, i'd take him over Perez. where did you hear he was "dicky"? metirish Jan 09 2009 11:36 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3up0zjlh]Pedro's pissed because Madoff stole more than he did from the 'pons.[/quote:3up0zjlh] Exactly what I was thinking , Pedro at least got away with it. Benjamin Grimm Jan 09 2009 11:39 AM It looks like Lowe has been pretty solid. He may not be as flashy as Perez, but I'll take solid over flashy. Especially after the last two seasons. Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 11:47 AM ="Nymr83"]="Edgy DC"]And Lowe is old and fat and pretty dicky. Nobody's perfect. he's old and relatively fat, but he was good the last 3 years in LA, i'd take him over Perez. where did you hear he was "dicky"? It's all over. Say his name out loud right now, and I guarantee, if at least three persons are within earshot, one of them will respond, "That guy's a dick!" Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 11:54 AM That's ambiguous. To clarify, by dick, I mean racially exclusive pill-popping carousing boozehound: http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2006/04/lowes_double_bad_day.php metirish Jan 09 2009 11:58 AM What a dick Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 12:03 PM You hear that, Nymr? Nymr83 Jan 09 2009 02:07 PM he doesn't count, he read the hit-piece that looks like it came straight from the wife's divorce lawyer. ok, maybe he's a dick, but he pitches well and doesn't look like a distraction on the field (Ramirez-style) so whatever. the Mets need pitching, even pitching with flawed personal lives. Benjamin Grimm Jan 09 2009 02:14 PM Yeah, we're looking for a pitcher, not a brother-in-law. Zvon Jan 09 2009 02:28 PM I read they gave Scott Boros a tour of Citi Field the other day. WTF? Nymr83 Jan 09 2009 02:33 PM "...and on your right you'll see the private suite we reserve for players' agents, but only if their clients have signed with us..." Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 03:02 PM Since when are you Mr. Tolerate Personal Flaws? Nymr83 Jan 09 2009 04:13 PM since we needed the pitching Edgy DC Jan 10 2009 09:29 PM Root the Yankees. They got it all. Me, I'm definitely for the non-dickulous. Frayed Knot Jan 11 2009 09:18 AM Not exactly anything new here, but Newsday's Ken Davidoff suggests[/url:3tucfsf7] that the Mets "remain confident" that they'll wind up with either Lowe or a return engagement by Ollie Perez. He mentions the recent Braves meeting with Lowe - but that's just one team. He goes on to quote pitching-hungry Brewer GM Doug Melvin as saying that; "I haven't even talked to Scott Boras" Also the Phils recent re-upping of CH Park pretty much fills out their rotation. While the BoSox have put a retainer on the rehabbing law firm of Smoltz, Penny, & Saito. Ashie62 Jan 11 2009 09:38 AM Omar hires the law firm Trickem Dickem & Lickem to pursue a starting pitcher. Derek Lowes numbers are solid over the last 3 years. He throws strikes. Is he a dick? As said earlier ask a few people about anyone and we're all dicks. I'm a dick and have a small one to prove it. I wonder if Oliver Twist is pissed the Mets made him sing for his supper this season and is apparently likely to see his price drop. Maybe Ben Sheet's price will go down to reasonable lets take a shot territory.. metsguyinmichigan Jan 11 2009 09:08 PM If the Braves get Lowe, that makes it easier to sign Perez, no? One fewer team with money looking for a starter? John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 11 2009 09:46 PM Braves apparently have signed that Kenshin Kawakami guy. If he's a starter, maybe they're out too. Centerfield Jan 12 2009 08:16 AM Ken Rosenthal said they were "all over" Lowe in an article over the weekend. So if you follow the logic of this thread, the Braves really like dick. metirish Jan 12 2009 08:39 AM Here's a new wrinkle to the Lowe talks. Jon Heyman ] Mets: Lowe-ball pitcher needed A secret batting practice session with David Wright, Daniel Murphy and Nick Evans last September at Citifield convinced all the players that the Mets' new home won't be the pitching park Mets people expected, but rather a launching pad for home runs. And some within their hierarchy have used this inside knowledge to stump for Lowe, a groundball pitcher, suggesting he might work better than Oliver Perez, a flyball pitcher. Lowe is far from a certainty to join the Mets, however. He is in play for the Braves and quite possibly the under-the-radar Phillies. The Brewers and Angels are outside possibilities (the Red Sox have to be out now after signing Cooperstown-bound John Smoltz). At this point, Lowe appears most likely ticketed for one of those three NL East teams. The Braves still have $60 million to $80 million left over from what they didn't spend on A.J. Burnett. But if Lowe goes to the world champion Phillies, that would give them a superb five-man rotation and put them in a dominating position to win the division for the third straight year. Even so, the Mets don't appear to be all in for Lowe to this point. GM Omar Minaya, who met with Carlos Beltran and Carlos Delgado during their recruitment periods and plans to meet soon with Pedro Martinez, has yet to meet with Lowe, who has huddled with the Braves and Phillies already. It seems that while some Mets people have stumped hard for Lowe, Minaya prefers the young left-hander Perez, which might explain their lukewarm $36-million, three-year offer to Lowe. Unless they change their stance, maybe Minaya will get his wish and be able to go after Perez after all. I had not heard this before , I knew about the BP but not that CF might be a launching pad. Of course we won't know until actual play but still I shudder at the thoughts of that. Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 08:53 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 12 2009 09:42 AM ="Nymr83"]he doesn't count, he read the hit-piece that looks like it came straight from the wife's divorce lawyer. Read it again. The depositions are open public records. That he threw his wife over for the FOX chick, that's public knowledge. That he was (is?) using Adderall, prescribed by a team doctor without an exam, that comes from his deposition. That the Red Sox suspected a drinking problem, his deposition also. That he got drunk in the clubhouse after games with the clubhouse manager, that comes from Trinka. But the manager disputes only the degrees, not the facts, though the degrees are higly relevant. That he was busted after a domestic disturbance, there's no independent source, but it can't be hard for a reporter to find one, and we don't get a denial. The explicitly segregated dinners, right out of the horse's mouth.Not in that report, in March 2006, Lowe whined that "he just didn't care" and wanted to go on the disabled list with "emotional distress" because of the hard times brought on him when he was discovered to be a womanizing jock. I mean, carrying on with a TV reporter, who could have expected that to go public? smg58 Jan 12 2009 09:27 AM [url:1dwd0gfh]http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/1/7/711009/citi-field-where-homeruns[/url:1dwd0gfh] Amazingly, it wasn't hard at all to find an article suggesting exactly the opposite of what Heyman says about Citifield. seawolf17 Jan 12 2009 09:50 AM ="smg58":27rfu7sx][url:27rfu7sx]http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/1/7/711009/citi-field-where-homeruns[/url:27rfu7sx] Amazingly, it wasn't hard at all to find an article suggesting exactly the opposite of what Heyman says about Citifield.[/quote:27rfu7sx] That was what I remembered also, not the "launching pad" thing. Heyman's an ass. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 12 2009 09:56 AM ="seawolf17":18o7iaxe]="smg58":18o7iaxe][url:18o7iaxe]http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/1/7/711009/citi-field-where-homeruns[/url:18o7iaxe] Amazingly, it wasn't hard at all to find an article suggesting exactly the opposite of what Heyman says about Citifield.[/quote:18o7iaxe] That was what I remembered also, not the "launching pad" thing. Heyman's an ass.[/quote:18o7iaxe] I don't buy that linked story either, at least not all of it. I think we'll have to wait and see. I think stuff like the batter's eye and lighting has as much or more to do with it than fence heights and configurations. The Mets have also indicated the fences can go up or down if needed, I think I read somewhere. batmagadanleadoff Jan 12 2009 09:57 AM ="smg58":1lloyi2s][url:1lloyi2s]http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/1/7/711009/citi-field-where-homeruns[/url:1lloyi2s] Amazingly, it wasn't hard at all to find an article suggesting exactly the opposite of what Heyman says about Citifield.[/quote:1lloyi2s] This was a good read. By the way, I was always under the impression that Citi Field would favor the pitcher slightly. So Heyman's piece notwithstanding, am I misremembering? metirish Jan 12 2009 09:58 AM No you are not misremembering but I think Heyman read Jeff Wilpon talking about Evens " even hitting them over the wall" and came to the logical conclusion that it must be a launching pad. Frayed Knot Jan 12 2009 10:01 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 12 2009 10:03 AM According to the Mets, CitiField was designed to be, at worst, neutral and hopefully favoring pitchers somewhat. But like someone said above, the proof is in the playing and all kinds of things can affect the final outcome that may not have been thought of by the planners. It's a lot more than just the numbers on the wall. Was it the new place in Philly or in Cincy (or maybe both) where open areas behind home/3rd led to wind tunnels that carried the balls out towards RF much more than anyone thought. Neither was necessarily designed as homer-happy palaces. CF is going to be more enclosed than Shea and also turned some 25-30 degrees to the north. Not sure how much/if those will factor in. I think Heyman is taking a quickie impression based on an impromptu BP session and drawing a whole lotta silly conclusions from it. batmagadanleadoff Jan 12 2009 10:03 AM ="metirish":3lsk2pws]No you are not misremembering but I think Heyman read Jeff Wilpon talking about Evens " even hitting them over the wall" and came to the logical conclusion that it must be a launching pad.[/quote:3lsk2pws] I'll say this for Heyman in fairness -- like him or not (and I'm not sure where I stand) last season, he was by far, the most accurate reporter at predicting future Mets moves ... especially during the will-they-fire-Willie and when-will-they-fire-Willie phase of the 2008 season. TransMonk Jan 12 2009 10:03 AM I don't know why anyone would think the new park will be a "launching pad". If I had to predict, I would say Citi will play similar to the new Ted in Atlanta. Similar elevation, dimensions and direction. Anything's possible depending on how the wind reacts, but I haven't seen much evidence to this point that Citi will favor HR hitters. Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 10:09 AM ="TransMonk":2hobzjr5]I don't know why anyone would think the new park will be a "launching pad".[/quote:2hobzjr5] A single batting practice session with three players, that's why! seawolf17 Jan 12 2009 10:52 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":wqe3qe7s]The Mets have also indicated the fences can go up or down if needed, I think I read somewhere.[/quote:wqe3qe7s] I say they put them up when we're in the field, and down when we're at the plate. Benjamin Grimm Jan 12 2009 11:24 AM Bill Veeck tried something like that in the minor leagues. He had a chain link fence installed on a track on top of the regular fence. When the home team was batting, the fence would be rolled off to the side, and when the visitors were up it would be rolled back into place. Needless to say, he didn't get away with that for long. Nymr83 Jan 12 2009 12:45 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":ips0smpy]Bill Veeck tried something like that in the minor leagues. He had a chain link fence installed on a track on top of the regular fence. When the home team was batting, the fence would be rolled off to the side, and when the visitors were up it would be rolled back into place. Needless to say, he didn't get away with that for long.[/quote:ips0smpy] yeah, but that leads to a better idea that you might get away with... having a higher "portable" fence in games started by your flyball pitchers than you do in games started by your groundballers. Gwreck Jan 12 2009 06:12 PM ="Nymr83":1gekmyvr]yeah, but that leads to a better idea that you might get away with... having a higher "portable" fence in games started by your flyball pitchers than you do in games started by your groundballers.[/quote:1gekmyvr] I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think that's actually prohibited. Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 08:02 PM Yes it is. Teams need league permission before changing ballpark dimiensions, and I'm certain they'd be intolerant of a team changing them daily on the basis of who is pitching.. Nymr83 Jan 12 2009 08:47 PM is the height of a wall included in dimensions though? or are "dimensions" just the distance from homeplate to the wall? Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 09:00 PM I guess it's a valid question, but I consider the z axis to be a dimension. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 12 2009 09:39 PM I am sure that changing fence heights would require prior league approval. Frayed Knot Jan 13 2009 06:16 AM Yeah, something like that would almost certainly be done between seasons and only after notifying MLB and probably after waiting for permission. All Jeffy said was the OF was designed with the possibility of fine-tuning the wall height in mind (and maybe even small changes in distances in some spots) so that if minor adjustments were needed it wouldn't mean tearing out certain seats and blocking the views of others if the place started to look too hitter-friendly (or, presumably, too pitcher-friendly). MFS62 Jan 13 2009 06:46 AM Discussion about whether or not CitiField will be a launching pad is premature because the wind currents when Shea is down are not known yet. Later Nymr83 Jan 13 2009 07:18 AM but isn't shea basically behind homeplate which is closed off anyway? i'd only expect shea to significantly effect the winds there if shea was facing an open part of stadium. i have no proof of this, but i got the feeling every game i went to this year that citifield was having a huge effect on the winds inside shea Centerfield Jan 13 2009 07:54 AM Back to the original topic. Heyman has the Braves going 4 years, close to $60 million for Lowe. Vince Coleman Firecracker Jan 13 2009 08:05 AM ="Centerfield":3os7gt8v]Back to the original topic. Heyman has the Braves going 4 years, close to $60 million for Lowe.[/quote:3os7gt8v] Gak! Where's Ben Sheets? metirish Jan 13 2009 08:07 AM In that same Heyman article he says the Mets are proposing a three year $30 million deal for Ollie , I don't see that getting it done. seawolf17 Jan 13 2009 09:24 AM Lowe's a Brave: http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/braves/stories/2009/01/13/braves_lowe.html Edgy DC Jan 13 2009 09:25 AM Welcome back, Ollie! Benjamin Grimm Jan 13 2009 09:27 AM Yuck. seawolf17 Jan 13 2009 09:29 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":26lhjjuj]Yuck.[/quote:26lhjjuj] No, I'm okay with that: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=270719119 bmfc1 Jan 13 2009 09:36 AM Heyman seems to be the first to report any news about Boras's clients. Peter Gammons, on January 07, said: "A lot of general managers and those of us in the business kid about a couple of sites referred to as ScottBoras.com, and Scott will float things out there and throw it out there and people will report it...." http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/01/gammonss_take.html I wonder if he was referring to Heyman. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 13 2009 09:37 AM For an xtra year and an xtra 24 million they can have him. Now let's get Ollie. metirish Jan 13 2009 09:40 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3qgkl57i]For an xtra year and an xtra 24 million they can have him. Now let's get Ollie.[/quote:3qgkl57i] Exactly , the four years is bad but they also seemed to have blown the door open with the $60 million , who did they think they were competing with? attgig Jan 13 2009 09:49 AM ="metirish":27ncuko8]="John Cougar Lunchbucket":27ncuko8]For an xtra year and an xtra 24 million they can have him. Now let's get Ollie.[/quote:27ncuko8] Exactly , the four years is bad but they also seemed to have blown the door open with the $60 million , who did they think they were competing with?[/quote:27ncuko8] a mystery team. who else? Fman99 Jan 13 2009 09:52 AM Good. Way too much money/years for a guy who is 36 and has his head screwed on sideways. I like Sheets or Ollie at this point as a #4 guy. Benjamin Grimm Jan 13 2009 09:58 AM I really wanted them to get someone better than Oliver Perez. I wanted a number 2 guy. Oh well. I would have been more optimistic heading into the season with Lowe than Perez. At least Redding should be an upgrade over Pedro. metsguyinmichigan Jan 13 2009 10:02 AM I'm very OK with this. That deal is going to look horrible before too long. Ollie can be lights out. He'll probably toss our first no-hitter. A seven-walk, two hit-batsman no-hitter, granted. smg58 Jan 13 2009 11:08 AM ="smg58":3cvsi3pd]A month or so ago I thought Derek Lowe would present the best value of the free agent pitchers. But I hear more rumors about teams being interested in him than in anybody else. I no longer think he'll come that cheap. He's more consistent and durable than any other pitcher on the market besides CC, but at his age I wouldn't want to be the team that offers him a fourth year at $15M+ per.[/quote:3cvsi3pd] I said that on Nov. 5, and I'm sticking to it. A Boy Named Seo Jan 13 2009 11:13 AM Good job, Mets. I don't doubt Lowe woulda been fine this year, maybe better than Ollie, and maybe good next year, too. But they weren't gonna go four expensive years on a 36-year old guy period, and they stuck to that. MFS62 Jan 13 2009 11:42 AM From age 37-40, Curt Schilling went sometning like 51-24, with ERA+ from 80 (one year) to 150 (best during that span). Not saying Lowe can come close to that, but it can happen. Of course there are probably many examples of rapid declines, too. But Lowe reminds me of Schilling - a bulldog. I wanted him on the Mets. Later Frayed Knot Jan 13 2009 01:21 PM ="batmagadanleadoff":r9o9y1ku]I'll say this for Heyman in fairness -- like him or not (and I'm not sure where I stand) last season, he was by far, the most accurate reporter at predicting future Mets moves ... especially during the will-they-fire-Willie and when-will-they-fire-Willie phase of the 2008 season.[/quote:r9o9y1ku] Heyman has long been a first-rate baseball reporter as far as digging out the facts and getting them right more often than not and often getting them first. And he didn't always get the credit for his scoops due to the tendency of the national press to cite the big-city dailies while overlooking Heyman's suburban-based Newsday. It may have been those frequent slights that prompted him to leave the newspaper biz for the brighter lights of SI, WFAN, SNY, and now MLBTV. Heyman's columnist persona while he was still at Newsday tended to irk a few around here from time to time but that was usually separate from his regular reporter chores. Nymr83 Jan 13 2009 01:30 PM too much and too long for Lowe, i'm glad it wasn't us.

if he'd done that over his 194 innings he'd have walked 90, still good for 5th most in the leaguw. so his walks went from atrocious to merely bad.

="Edgy DC":1qbzwli1].271![/quote:1qbzwli1] 105! * Perez's league-leading walk total Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 08:29 AM The walk rate also dropped precipitously after Manuel came in, from 5.97 to 4.21 per nine innings. Nymr83 Jan 09 2009 08:35 AM if he'd done that over his 194 innings he'd have walked 90, still good for 5th most in the leaguw. so his walks went from atrocious to merely bad. Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 09:15 AM And Lowe is old and fat and pretty dicky. Nobody's perfect. Frayed Knot Jan 09 2009 11:11 AM Petey comes out in favor[/url:nsem0o4a] of the Mets signing Lowe ... he also comes out in favor of the Mets signing Petey!! metirish Jan 09 2009 11:15 AM Hilarious from Pedro in regards to Fred and Jeff. ] "I don't go to the papers a lot, but I know what happened to [team owner] Mr. Fred Wilpon, and I feel very badly for him," Martinez said, referring to Wilpon's investments with alleged swindler Bernard Madoff. "I feel very badly for the whole organization that those things happen. I wish I could do something. I just pray that [Wilpon] bounces back and we can give him the World Series that he deserves." John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 09 2009 11:32 AM Pedro's pissed because Madoff stole more than he did from the 'pons. Nymr83 Jan 09 2009 11:32 AM ="Edgy DC":er6x240t]And Lowe is old and fat and pretty dicky. Nobody's perfect.[/quote:er6x240t] he's old and relatively fat, but he was good the last 3 years in LA, i'd take him over Perez. where did you hear he was "dicky"? metirish Jan 09 2009 11:36 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3up0zjlh]Pedro's pissed because Madoff stole more than he did from the 'pons.[/quote:3up0zjlh] Exactly what I was thinking , Pedro at least got away with it. Benjamin Grimm Jan 09 2009 11:39 AM It looks like Lowe has been pretty solid. He may not be as flashy as Perez, but I'll take solid over flashy. Especially after the last two seasons. Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 11:47 AM ="Nymr83"]="Edgy DC"]And Lowe is old and fat and pretty dicky. Nobody's perfect. he's old and relatively fat, but he was good the last 3 years in LA, i'd take him over Perez. where did you hear he was "dicky"? It's all over. Say his name out loud right now, and I guarantee, if at least three persons are within earshot, one of them will respond, "That guy's a dick!" Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 11:54 AM That's ambiguous. To clarify, by dick, I mean racially exclusive pill-popping carousing boozehound: http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2006/04/lowes_double_bad_day.php metirish Jan 09 2009 11:58 AM What a dick Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 12:03 PM You hear that, Nymr? Nymr83 Jan 09 2009 02:07 PM he doesn't count, he read the hit-piece that looks like it came straight from the wife's divorce lawyer. ok, maybe he's a dick, but he pitches well and doesn't look like a distraction on the field (Ramirez-style) so whatever. the Mets need pitching, even pitching with flawed personal lives. Benjamin Grimm Jan 09 2009 02:14 PM Yeah, we're looking for a pitcher, not a brother-in-law. Zvon Jan 09 2009 02:28 PM I read they gave Scott Boros a tour of Citi Field the other day. WTF? Nymr83 Jan 09 2009 02:33 PM "...and on your right you'll see the private suite we reserve for players' agents, but only if their clients have signed with us..." Edgy DC Jan 09 2009 03:02 PM Since when are you Mr. Tolerate Personal Flaws? Nymr83 Jan 09 2009 04:13 PM since we needed the pitching Edgy DC Jan 10 2009 09:29 PM Root the Yankees. They got it all. Me, I'm definitely for the non-dickulous. Frayed Knot Jan 11 2009 09:18 AM Not exactly anything new here, but Newsday's Ken Davidoff suggests[/url:3tucfsf7] that the Mets "remain confident" that they'll wind up with either Lowe or a return engagement by Ollie Perez. He mentions the recent Braves meeting with Lowe - but that's just one team. He goes on to quote pitching-hungry Brewer GM Doug Melvin as saying that; "I haven't even talked to Scott Boras" Also the Phils recent re-upping of CH Park pretty much fills out their rotation. While the BoSox have put a retainer on the rehabbing law firm of Smoltz, Penny, & Saito. Ashie62 Jan 11 2009 09:38 AM Omar hires the law firm Trickem Dickem & Lickem to pursue a starting pitcher. Derek Lowes numbers are solid over the last 3 years. He throws strikes. Is he a dick? As said earlier ask a few people about anyone and we're all dicks. I'm a dick and have a small one to prove it. I wonder if Oliver Twist is pissed the Mets made him sing for his supper this season and is apparently likely to see his price drop. Maybe Ben Sheet's price will go down to reasonable lets take a shot territory.. metsguyinmichigan Jan 11 2009 09:08 PM If the Braves get Lowe, that makes it easier to sign Perez, no? One fewer team with money looking for a starter? John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 11 2009 09:46 PM Braves apparently have signed that Kenshin Kawakami guy. If he's a starter, maybe they're out too. Centerfield Jan 12 2009 08:16 AM Ken Rosenthal said they were "all over" Lowe in an article over the weekend. So if you follow the logic of this thread, the Braves really like dick. metirish Jan 12 2009 08:39 AM Here's a new wrinkle to the Lowe talks. Jon Heyman ] Mets: Lowe-ball pitcher needed A secret batting practice session with David Wright, Daniel Murphy and Nick Evans last September at Citifield convinced all the players that the Mets' new home won't be the pitching park Mets people expected, but rather a launching pad for home runs. And some within their hierarchy have used this inside knowledge to stump for Lowe, a groundball pitcher, suggesting he might work better than Oliver Perez, a flyball pitcher. Lowe is far from a certainty to join the Mets, however. He is in play for the Braves and quite possibly the under-the-radar Phillies. The Brewers and Angels are outside possibilities (the Red Sox have to be out now after signing Cooperstown-bound John Smoltz). At this point, Lowe appears most likely ticketed for one of those three NL East teams. The Braves still have $60 million to $80 million left over from what they didn't spend on A.J. Burnett. But if Lowe goes to the world champion Phillies, that would give them a superb five-man rotation and put them in a dominating position to win the division for the third straight year. Even so, the Mets don't appear to be all in for Lowe to this point. GM Omar Minaya, who met with Carlos Beltran and Carlos Delgado during their recruitment periods and plans to meet soon with Pedro Martinez, has yet to meet with Lowe, who has huddled with the Braves and Phillies already. It seems that while some Mets people have stumped hard for Lowe, Minaya prefers the young left-hander Perez, which might explain their lukewarm $36-million, three-year offer to Lowe. Unless they change their stance, maybe Minaya will get his wish and be able to go after Perez after all. I had not heard this before , I knew about the BP but not that CF might be a launching pad. Of course we won't know until actual play but still I shudder at the thoughts of that. Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 08:53 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 12 2009 09:42 AM ="Nymr83"]he doesn't count, he read the hit-piece that looks like it came straight from the wife's divorce lawyer. Read it again. The depositions are open public records. That he threw his wife over for the FOX chick, that's public knowledge. That he was (is?) using Adderall, prescribed by a team doctor without an exam, that comes from his deposition. That the Red Sox suspected a drinking problem, his deposition also. That he got drunk in the clubhouse after games with the clubhouse manager, that comes from Trinka. But the manager disputes only the degrees, not the facts, though the degrees are higly relevant. That he was busted after a domestic disturbance, there's no independent source, but it can't be hard for a reporter to find one, and we don't get a denial. The explicitly segregated dinners, right out of the horse's mouth.Not in that report, in March 2006, Lowe whined that "he just didn't care" and wanted to go on the disabled list with "emotional distress" because of the hard times brought on him when he was discovered to be a womanizing jock. I mean, carrying on with a TV reporter, who could have expected that to go public? smg58 Jan 12 2009 09:27 AM [url:1dwd0gfh]http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/1/7/711009/citi-field-where-homeruns[/url:1dwd0gfh] Amazingly, it wasn't hard at all to find an article suggesting exactly the opposite of what Heyman says about Citifield. seawolf17 Jan 12 2009 09:50 AM ="smg58":27rfu7sx][url:27rfu7sx]http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/1/7/711009/citi-field-where-homeruns[/url:27rfu7sx] Amazingly, it wasn't hard at all to find an article suggesting exactly the opposite of what Heyman says about Citifield.[/quote:27rfu7sx] That was what I remembered also, not the "launching pad" thing. Heyman's an ass. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 12 2009 09:56 AM ="seawolf17":18o7iaxe]="smg58":18o7iaxe][url:18o7iaxe]http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/1/7/711009/citi-field-where-homeruns[/url:18o7iaxe] Amazingly, it wasn't hard at all to find an article suggesting exactly the opposite of what Heyman says about Citifield.[/quote:18o7iaxe] That was what I remembered also, not the "launching pad" thing. Heyman's an ass.[/quote:18o7iaxe] I don't buy that linked story either, at least not all of it. I think we'll have to wait and see. I think stuff like the batter's eye and lighting has as much or more to do with it than fence heights and configurations. The Mets have also indicated the fences can go up or down if needed, I think I read somewhere. batmagadanleadoff Jan 12 2009 09:57 AM ="smg58":1lloyi2s][url:1lloyi2s]http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/1/7/711009/citi-field-where-homeruns[/url:1lloyi2s] Amazingly, it wasn't hard at all to find an article suggesting exactly the opposite of what Heyman says about Citifield.[/quote:1lloyi2s] This was a good read. By the way, I was always under the impression that Citi Field would favor the pitcher slightly. So Heyman's piece notwithstanding, am I misremembering? metirish Jan 12 2009 09:58 AM No you are not misremembering but I think Heyman read Jeff Wilpon talking about Evens " even hitting them over the wall" and came to the logical conclusion that it must be a launching pad. Frayed Knot Jan 12 2009 10:01 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 12 2009 10:03 AM According to the Mets, CitiField was designed to be, at worst, neutral and hopefully favoring pitchers somewhat. But like someone said above, the proof is in the playing and all kinds of things can affect the final outcome that may not have been thought of by the planners. It's a lot more than just the numbers on the wall. Was it the new place in Philly or in Cincy (or maybe both) where open areas behind home/3rd led to wind tunnels that carried the balls out towards RF much more than anyone thought. Neither was necessarily designed as homer-happy palaces. CF is going to be more enclosed than Shea and also turned some 25-30 degrees to the north. Not sure how much/if those will factor in. I think Heyman is taking a quickie impression based on an impromptu BP session and drawing a whole lotta silly conclusions from it. batmagadanleadoff Jan 12 2009 10:03 AM ="metirish":3lsk2pws]No you are not misremembering but I think Heyman read Jeff Wilpon talking about Evens " even hitting them over the wall" and came to the logical conclusion that it must be a launching pad.[/quote:3lsk2pws] I'll say this for Heyman in fairness -- like him or not (and I'm not sure where I stand) last season, he was by far, the most accurate reporter at predicting future Mets moves ... especially during the will-they-fire-Willie and when-will-they-fire-Willie phase of the 2008 season. TransMonk Jan 12 2009 10:03 AM I don't know why anyone would think the new park will be a "launching pad". If I had to predict, I would say Citi will play similar to the new Ted in Atlanta. Similar elevation, dimensions and direction. Anything's possible depending on how the wind reacts, but I haven't seen much evidence to this point that Citi will favor HR hitters. Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 10:09 AM ="TransMonk":2hobzjr5]I don't know why anyone would think the new park will be a "launching pad".[/quote:2hobzjr5] A single batting practice session with three players, that's why! seawolf17 Jan 12 2009 10:52 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":wqe3qe7s]The Mets have also indicated the fences can go up or down if needed, I think I read somewhere.[/quote:wqe3qe7s] I say they put them up when we're in the field, and down when we're at the plate. Benjamin Grimm Jan 12 2009 11:24 AM Bill Veeck tried something like that in the minor leagues. He had a chain link fence installed on a track on top of the regular fence. When the home team was batting, the fence would be rolled off to the side, and when the visitors were up it would be rolled back into place. Needless to say, he didn't get away with that for long. Nymr83 Jan 12 2009 12:45 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":ips0smpy]Bill Veeck tried something like that in the minor leagues. He had a chain link fence installed on a track on top of the regular fence. When the home team was batting, the fence would be rolled off to the side, and when the visitors were up it would be rolled back into place. Needless to say, he didn't get away with that for long.[/quote:ips0smpy] yeah, but that leads to a better idea that you might get away with... having a higher "portable" fence in games started by your flyball pitchers than you do in games started by your groundballers. Gwreck Jan 12 2009 06:12 PM ="Nymr83":1gekmyvr]yeah, but that leads to a better idea that you might get away with... having a higher "portable" fence in games started by your flyball pitchers than you do in games started by your groundballers.[/quote:1gekmyvr] I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think that's actually prohibited. Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 08:02 PM Yes it is. Teams need league permission before changing ballpark dimiensions, and I'm certain they'd be intolerant of a team changing them daily on the basis of who is pitching.. Nymr83 Jan 12 2009 08:47 PM is the height of a wall included in dimensions though? or are "dimensions" just the distance from homeplate to the wall? Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 09:00 PM I guess it's a valid question, but I consider the z axis to be a dimension. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 12 2009 09:39 PM I am sure that changing fence heights would require prior league approval. Frayed Knot Jan 13 2009 06:16 AM Yeah, something like that would almost certainly be done between seasons and only after notifying MLB and probably after waiting for permission. All Jeffy said was the OF was designed with the possibility of fine-tuning the wall height in mind (and maybe even small changes in distances in some spots) so that if minor adjustments were needed it wouldn't mean tearing out certain seats and blocking the views of others if the place started to look too hitter-friendly (or, presumably, too pitcher-friendly). MFS62 Jan 13 2009 06:46 AM Discussion about whether or not CitiField will be a launching pad is premature because the wind currents when Shea is down are not known yet. Later Nymr83 Jan 13 2009 07:18 AM but isn't shea basically behind homeplate which is closed off anyway? i'd only expect shea to significantly effect the winds there if shea was facing an open part of stadium. i have no proof of this, but i got the feeling every game i went to this year that citifield was having a huge effect on the winds inside shea Centerfield Jan 13 2009 07:54 AM Back to the original topic. Heyman has the Braves going 4 years, close to $60 million for Lowe. Vince Coleman Firecracker Jan 13 2009 08:05 AM ="Centerfield":3os7gt8v]Back to the original topic. Heyman has the Braves going 4 years, close to $60 million for Lowe.[/quote:3os7gt8v] Gak! Where's Ben Sheets? metirish Jan 13 2009 08:07 AM In that same Heyman article he says the Mets are proposing a three year $30 million deal for Ollie , I don't see that getting it done. seawolf17 Jan 13 2009 09:24 AM Lowe's a Brave: http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/braves/stories/2009/01/13/braves_lowe.html Edgy DC Jan 13 2009 09:25 AM Welcome back, Ollie! Benjamin Grimm Jan 13 2009 09:27 AM Yuck. seawolf17 Jan 13 2009 09:29 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":26lhjjuj]Yuck.[/quote:26lhjjuj] No, I'm okay with that: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=270719119 bmfc1 Jan 13 2009 09:36 AM Heyman seems to be the first to report any news about Boras's clients. Peter Gammons, on January 07, said: "A lot of general managers and those of us in the business kid about a couple of sites referred to as ScottBoras.com, and Scott will float things out there and throw it out there and people will report it...." http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/01/gammonss_take.html I wonder if he was referring to Heyman. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 13 2009 09:37 AM For an xtra year and an xtra 24 million they can have him. Now let's get Ollie. metirish Jan 13 2009 09:40 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3qgkl57i]For an xtra year and an xtra 24 million they can have him. Now let's get Ollie.[/quote:3qgkl57i] Exactly , the four years is bad but they also seemed to have blown the door open with the $60 million , who did they think they were competing with? attgig Jan 13 2009 09:49 AM ="metirish":27ncuko8]="John Cougar Lunchbucket":27ncuko8]For an xtra year and an xtra 24 million they can have him. Now let's get Ollie.[/quote:27ncuko8] Exactly , the four years is bad but they also seemed to have blown the door open with the $60 million , who did they think they were competing with?[/quote:27ncuko8] a mystery team. who else? Fman99 Jan 13 2009 09:52 AM Good. Way too much money/years for a guy who is 36 and has his head screwed on sideways. I like Sheets or Ollie at this point as a #4 guy. Benjamin Grimm Jan 13 2009 09:58 AM I really wanted them to get someone better than Oliver Perez. I wanted a number 2 guy. Oh well. I would have been more optimistic heading into the season with Lowe than Perez. At least Redding should be an upgrade over Pedro. metsguyinmichigan Jan 13 2009 10:02 AM I'm very OK with this. That deal is going to look horrible before too long. Ollie can be lights out. He'll probably toss our first no-hitter. A seven-walk, two hit-batsman no-hitter, granted. smg58 Jan 13 2009 11:08 AM ="smg58":3cvsi3pd]A month or so ago I thought Derek Lowe would present the best value of the free agent pitchers. But I hear more rumors about teams being interested in him than in anybody else. I no longer think he'll come that cheap. He's more consistent and durable than any other pitcher on the market besides CC, but at his age I wouldn't want to be the team that offers him a fourth year at $15M+ per.[/quote:3cvsi3pd] I said that on Nov. 5, and I'm sticking to it. A Boy Named Seo Jan 13 2009 11:13 AM Good job, Mets. I don't doubt Lowe woulda been fine this year, maybe better than Ollie, and maybe good next year, too. But they weren't gonna go four expensive years on a 36-year old guy period, and they stuck to that. MFS62 Jan 13 2009 11:42 AM From age 37-40, Curt Schilling went sometning like 51-24, with ERA+ from 80 (one year) to 150 (best during that span). Not saying Lowe can come close to that, but it can happen. Of course there are probably many examples of rapid declines, too. But Lowe reminds me of Schilling - a bulldog. I wanted him on the Mets. Later Frayed Knot Jan 13 2009 01:21 PM ="batmagadanleadoff":r9o9y1ku]I'll say this for Heyman in fairness -- like him or not (and I'm not sure where I stand) last season, he was by far, the most accurate reporter at predicting future Mets moves ... especially during the will-they-fire-Willie and when-will-they-fire-Willie phase of the 2008 season.[/quote:r9o9y1ku] Heyman has long been a first-rate baseball reporter as far as digging out the facts and getting them right more often than not and often getting them first. And he didn't always get the credit for his scoops due to the tendency of the national press to cite the big-city dailies while overlooking Heyman's suburban-based Newsday. It may have been those frequent slights that prompted him to leave the newspaper biz for the brighter lights of SI, WFAN, SNY, and now MLBTV. Heyman's columnist persona while he was still at Newsday tended to irk a few around here from time to time but that was usually separate from his regular reporter chores. Nymr83 Jan 13 2009 01:30 PM too much and too long for Lowe, i'm glad it wasn't us.

Kranepool should be allowed to hit, as should Grote if necessary. If Garrett comes up with 2 outs pinch-hit your best contact hitter, if he comes up with 1 out and the game is already tied with a runner on 3rd bring up a fly-ball guy. is this stratomatic? OOTP?

i'm sure a sportswriter will take what sources he can get, and Boras has far more incentive to get chatty with him than Minaya does

thats just absurd.

]The point is that a sports governors' are allowed to decide thats not the point, because i never argued that they didn't have the authority to decide, i'm just arguing its a bad decision

i'm talking about things you eat/drink and i'm sure you knew that

he got fucked. and i really don't see the point in baseball banning things that are over-the-counter legal in the united states, where do they draw the line? is caffeine a performance enhancer?

="Elster88":1v9r4ck4]Val have you ever been right about anything ever?[/quote:1v9r4ck4] umm... he's a Mets fan. Rockin' Doc Jan 05 2009 05:58 PM Nymr - "umm... he's a Mets fan." That just proves he's smart, it doesn't necessarily make him right very often regarding other things. seawolf17 Jan 06 2009 07:20 AM It's not about being right, it's about having inside information and being adamant about it. Centerfield Jan 06 2009 12:27 PM Exactly. If you are going to pull the "I know more than you" act, insist that something will happen because of inside information, there are only two things you can end up being: 1. Right 2. A tool If #2 happens, take it like a man and admit you were wrong. Backpedaling and excuse making turns you into an even bigger tool. Valadius Jan 06 2009 02:55 PM Who says I made any excuses? Obviously he changed his mind. So would I, after having the kind of second half he had last year. Benjamin Grimm Jan 06 2009 03:01 PM It's not "obvious that he changed his mind." You're overlooking the other possibility: That you were wrong. SteveJRogers Jan 06 2009 06:49 PM ="Valadius":37nz4qvd]Who says I made any excuses? Obviously he changed his mind. So would I, after having the kind of second half he had last year.[/quote:37nz4qvd] Yeah but we probably would have heard about it by know, most likely around the time the Mets exercised the option. I mean who knows, we still may hear about it, but you'd think there would be a story saying "Delgado almost did the Mets a favor." Then again, there was nothing anywhere, all year long that suggested that he'd do the Mets a favor and retire, even with his first half.

="Frayed Knot":3k9t55qs]I suppose another option is that this age isn't really his age -- something that would explain the outliers on both sides of his career bracket.[/quote:3k9t55qs] adding 3-5 years would explain alot. MFS62 Jan 05 2009 07:30 PM He's ... http://www.mtvmusic.com/yankovic_weird_al/videos/111300/fat.jhtml Later

="Frayed Knot":3l2ojh0o]Results revealed a week from today. Meanwhile, Newsday's Ken Davidoff[/url:3l2ojh0o] reveals not only his ballot but his reasoning behind each vote while showing a willingness to change his mind and adapt to changing thinking. Plus I think I agree with him on all his choices (and non-choices).[/quote:3l2ojh0o] "The statistics stand the test of time. Our memories are not as reliable." That should be rule #1 of HOF voting. metirish Jan 05 2009 09:45 AM That's some good stuff there form Davidoff . I like his honesty and that he can change from year to year.

="Frayed Knot":1xejc7ja]Good news folks, Barry Bonds says that he should be fully recovered from the hip surgery he needs in time for opening day![/quote:1xejc7ja] Better news- nobody really cares about him anymore, including it seems the GMs of all 30 teams. DocTee Jan 02 2009 04:46 PM Tony Clark returns to D-Baggs: 1 year, 800K. metirish Jan 02 2009 05:34 PM Watching MLB Network Hot Stove and they are reporting that San Francisco have offered Manny Ramirez a four year deal. Dodgers and A Jones have agreed to defer most of his money owed likely leading to him playing elsewhere. Scott Proctor to the Marlins for one year. Ashie62 Jan 03 2009 12:33 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":2ytj1poh]This just in: Brian Fuentes to sign a two-year deal with the Angels.[/quote:2ytj1poh] This just in: Mets do nothing Although the Metsies may be sewing Andruw Jones a jersey and importing steroids for his locker metsmarathon Jan 03 2009 12:40 PM ="Ashie62":hblnrkgs]Although the Metsies may be sewing Andruw Jones a jersey and importing steroids for his locker[/quote:hblnrkgs] i don't believe that for a second. Edgy DC Jan 03 2009 12:58 PM ="Ashie62"]="Benjamin Grimm"]This just in: Brian Fuentes to sign a two-year deal with the Angels. This just in: Mets do nothing Although the Metsies may be sewing Andruw Jones a jersey and importing steroids for his locker Yeah, the Mets by not getting a third closer, are doing nothing. Kong76 Jan 03 2009 01:36 PM Maybe the three closer thing is the way to go after the last two seasons. Ashie62 Jan 05 2009 02:37 PM ="Edgy DC"]="Ashie62"]="Benjamin Grimm"]This just in: Brian Fuentes to sign a two-year deal with the Angels. This just in: Mets do nothing Although the Metsies may be sewing Andruw Jones a jersey and importing steroids for his locker Yeah, the Mets by not getting a third closer, are doing nothing. True..my impatience caused me to jump over Krod & Putz KP DOOTY...I'm just frustrated that the odds of landing a power corner and a decent SP , Sheets, Garland, Lowe..are diminishing and pray the Mets are not newly cash short Burrell has a rep for being a prick but if the Rays can land him at 16 million for 2 years I then wonder why the Mets wouldn't top that and not have to expect 150 games from Murphy and even let Murphy learn 2B at AAA as an experiment. smg58 Jan 05 2009 03:15 PM The Cubs apparently are giving 3 years and $30M to Milton Bradley. They expect him to play right field full time, even though he has had trouble staying in the lineup when he's been the DH. Given Burrell's deal and the fact that Abreu would have made much more sense for them, I really don't get this one. MFS62 Jan 05 2009 04:20 PM ="smg58":1gnuo0ct]The Cubs apparently are giving 3 years and $30M to Milton Bradley. They expect him to play right field full time, even though he has had trouble staying in the lineup when he's been the DH. Given Burrell's deal and the fact that Abreu would have made much more sense for them, I really don't get this one.[/quote:1gnuo0ct] Can't wait to see him go head-to-head with Pinella. Later smg58 Jan 07 2009 05:51 AM And the bargains continue. Jason Giambi returns to Oakland for a year and an option, and Jerry Hairston stays in Cincinnatti for a year and $2M. I don't get the Mets' lack of interest in Hairston at that price. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 07 2009 06:20 AM ="smg58":162h2ehz]And the bargains continue. Jason Giambi returns to Oakland for a year and an option, and Jerry Hairston stays in Cincinnatti for a year and $2M. I don't get the Mets' lack of interest in Hairston at that price.[/quote:162h2ehz] Makes ya crazy. Geez. I mean, about Hairston. Frayed Knot Jan 07 2009 07:18 AM Maybe Hairston gets a chance to start in Cincy and couldn't be sure of that here. Never did even hear a rumor of them looking at him though. Also: - Pavano to Cleveland for a year at a low base with lotsa IP incentives - Cubs deal Jason Marquis (de Sade) to Colorado for LH reliever Luis Vizcaino Edgy DC Jan 07 2009 07:42 AM Andy Pettitte turns down one year and $10 million from the Yanks in a declining market. Edgy DC Jan 07 2009 10:10 AM Yomiuri Giant Koji Uehara signs with Bal'more for two years. Reports say that he's the team's first Japanese player, but they forget Nippo-Hawaiian Len Sakata. Centerfield Jan 07 2009 10:41 AM Len was American. smg58 Jan 07 2009 10:58 AM ="Frayed Knot":2gsb44fr]- Pavano to Cleveland for a year at a low base with lotsa IP incentives - Cubs deal Jason Marquis (de Sade) to Colorado for LH reliever Luis Vizcaino[/quote:2gsb44fr] I'll laugh if Pavano gives the Indians 27 starts (i.e., more starts than he gave the MFY's in four years). The Marquis deal appears to leave Jorge de la Rosa out of the rotation in Colorado. I'd see what the asking price for him is; he finished very strongly last year, and he's at least as good as Tim Redding. Edgy DC Jan 07 2009 11:01 AM ="Centerfield":biqnwx39]Len was American.[/quote:biqnwx39] As I said. Frayed Knot Jan 07 2009 12:00 PM From the; 'How the (somewhat) mighty have fallen' department: 2B Marcus Giles signs a minor league deal with Philly MFS62 Jan 07 2009 12:14 PM ="Frayed Knot":3hnipcdi]From the; 'How the (somewhat) mighty have fallen' department: 2B Marcus Giles signs a minor league deal with Philly[/quote:3hnipcdi] Pure insurance with Utley out for the early part of the year due to surgery. Later metirish Jan 07 2009 08:04 PM From MetsBlog Mike Fitzpatrick of the Associated Press believes the Mets have made an offer to free-agent RHP Tim Redding, who was 3-1 with a 3.41 ERA in five starts against the Phillies last season Edgy DC Jan 07 2009 08:56 PM I'll give Redding this: with one inning and six runs, he may be the worst performing Yankee ever. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 07 2009 09:06 PM Bocco Radelli to the Sed Rox. Rockin' Doc Jan 07 2009 10:03 PM If Rocco Baldelli can be reasonably healthy, he could be a great pick up for the Red Sox. I hope he is healthy and has a great season for the Sox. Frayed Knot Jan 08 2009 07:39 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3gx2svou]Bocco Radelli to the Sed Rox.[/quote:3gx2svou] And quite possibly Smoltz too! Not official yet but several outlets are reporting it's 'bout a done deal. I guess they're promising him a starting job - don't think he would have jumped otherwise. Other reports have Trevor Hoffman going to the Brews ... although this is only one day after others had him headed to the Dodgers. Benjamin Grimm Jan 08 2009 07:46 AM Sort of a homecoming for Smoltz. Didn't he start his career with the Braves when they were still playing in Boston? John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 08 2009 07:50 AM No, the Tigers. Anywhoo, oughta soitenly remove Boston from the list of potential Lowe suitors (and cause me some concern too: Why don't any of Lowe's former employers want him back?) smg58 Jan 08 2009 07:50 AM The additions of Smoltz and Brad Penny probably take the Sox out of the discussions for Derek Lowe. Assuming Baldelli gets something like what Hairston got, I'd be a little annoyed that we didn't give him a look. We do need another righthanded bat. Frayed Knot Jan 08 2009 07:57 AM Yeah, I was half-hoping for Baldelli too. He's not a great player and has played fewer games in the last two seasons than Alou had in the two before we got him. But if this problem of his has finally been diagnosed correctly he could be a useful guy to have around. But Omar seems to be on this 'one problem at a time' schedule where nothing can even be talked about until the starter question is answered. metirish Jan 08 2009 08:01 AM Did bucket mis-read Ben's post? John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 08 2009 08:02 AM Yes. Yes I did. Frayed Knot Jan 08 2009 08:14 AM I almost did too because I sometimes confuse the Smoltz trade with the Bagwell one from Boston. The Smoltz from Detroit for Denny Alexander trade happened around the same era as Bagwell for Larry Anderson. Both were done for pennant push help and in each case the minor leaguers were home-town guys (Smoltz is from Mich, Bags from Conn) who turned into HoF possibilities. Edgy DC Jan 08 2009 08:17 AM Doyle Alexander. Now Denny McLain or somebody is getting into the conflation. metirish Jan 08 2009 10:25 AM Looking at a potential nightmare with outfield defense the MFY's are apparently looking to trade Swisher and Nady. Yankees fielding offers for Nady, Swisher Posted by: Jon Heyman The Yankees are fielding trade offers for corner outfielders Xavier Nady and Nick Swisher. There's been some speculation they might consider trading Hideki Matsui, too, but he has a full no-trade clause and is coming off knee surgery, so there's really no way to trade him. A logjam at the corners was created when the Yankees surprised a lot of folks and signed Mark Teixeira to an eight-year, $180 million contract. Swisher previously had been penciled in as the Yankees' first baseman but now becomes part of a crowded mix of accomplished corner outfielders. Swisher is a versatile player and can play some center field, as well. Some National League teams may be interested. However, Nady's trade value is higher after a better offensive season, so he may be just as likely to be dealt. Nady, acquired by the Yankees in a midseason trade with the Pirates, combined to hit .305 with 25 home runs and 97 RBIs for the year, while Swisher finished at .219 with 24 home runs and 69 RBIs for the White Sox before being dealt to the Yankees after the season Vic Sage Jan 08 2009 02:09 PM i'd sure take Nady back, to split time with Church, Murphy and Delgado. But no way the Yanx trade him cross town. Edgy DC Jan 08 2009 02:30 PM You leave Tatis out of that mix. Nady gives you what Tatis gives you, only more and probably better and definitely younger. Tatis' only advantage is playing third. I'd love a Nady around because I think the best way to get something like last year's productivity out of Tatis is to make him earn every at-bat. Benjamin Grimm Jan 08 2009 02:43 PM Maybe Murphy will do that, but I'm not counting on it. Edgy DC Jan 08 2009 02:46 PM What's going down, and I think a lot of us feel it, is that a lot of things went kind of right in Omar's offense that could have easily gone wronger, and he's kind of seeming to kind of be counting on a lot of those same thingies to go right again. Fans be pessemistic creatures, of course. Vic Sage Jan 08 2009 03:21 PM Last year, i think we got about as much as we can reasonably expect this year from 1b, ss, 3b and CF. We got nothing from 2b and C, and RF was a mixed bag. But Murphy/Tatis in LF certainly outperformed all expectations and i do not believe for a minute we'll get similar production from that combo again this year. So, we either upgrade at 2b, c, and/or Rf to compensate, or replace the LF combo before it blows up in our faces. Or we go into the season with 1/2 the lineup very well likely to suck, to one degree or another, even as Omar whistles past the graveyard. attgig Jan 08 2009 03:29 PM ="Vic Sage":37m9y64n]Last year, i think we got about as much as we can reasonably expect this year from 1b, ss, 3b and CF. We got nothing from 2b and C, and RF was a mixed bag. But Murphy/Tatis in LF certainly outperformed all expectations and i do not believe for a minute we'll get similar production from that combo again this year. So, we either upgrade at 2b, c, and/or Rf to compensate, or replace the LF combo before it blows up in our faces. Or we go into the season with 1/2 the lineup very well likely to suck, to one degree or another, even as Omar whistles past the graveyard.[/quote:37m9y64n] and you have a wild card at 1b, so it's not even half a lineup. nobody has faith in schnied to produce offensively, and while castro COULD provide some pop, he just gets hurt too often (he must be the worst backup catcher in the league). 2b, nobody has faith in castillo, except he's saying all the right things. and Church... will his head be screwed on straight? it'll be an interesting few more weeks before spring training. Benjamin Grimm Jan 08 2009 03:35 PM I agree with Vic, including about left field, but I'd be okay with giving Murphy/Tatis a chance to shine again. But in doing that, you have to protect yourself by beefing up some of the other positions. And as yet, the Mets haven't done anything towards that end. Edgy DC Jan 08 2009 07:12 PM Ramon Castro, not the worst backup catcher in the league. DocTee Jan 09 2009 09:42 AM John Smoltz, Red Sock. metirish Jan 09 2009 12:35 PM Swisher the Yanks' preferred candidate over Nady BY KEN DAVIDOFF | ken.davidoff@newsday.com January 9, 2009 In their current roster logjam, the Yankees would strongly prefer to trade Xavier Nady and retain Nick Swisher, a person familiar with the club's thinking said yesterday. General manager Brian Cashman has received more requests for Swisher than for Nady. With spring training more than a month away and the season opener just about three months away, however, there is no imperative to execute a quick trade. The Mets enjoyed having Nady on their club for the first four months of the 2006 season, and they inquired about him last July, when the Yankees wound up getting him from Pittsburgh. For now, however, the Mets are focused on their starting rotation and are not looking to acquire a bat either through free agency or through a trade. Frayed Knot Jan 09 2009 01:54 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 09 2009 02:02 PM Swisher switch-hits, and is better and more versatile defensively. He's also signed for the next few years which could be either good or bad depending on whether he regains his hitting from last season's off year. Nady is more likely to hit better (though walk less) and would only be for one year at a price to be determined by arbitration then would be a FA after that. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 09 2009 01:59 PM If we weren't already loaded with lefthanded hitting outfielders, I'd take Godzilla as a LH bench masher in the Franco/Staub mold. Frayed Knot Jan 09 2009 02:04 PM As long as the Cranks would pay 90% of the freight and expect nothing back in return, sure. (OK, maybe 70% with a throw-in going the other way would do) Ashie62 Jan 09 2009 05:10 PM I feel safe to say Tatis has had his middle aged career year..I wouldn't put too high a ceiling there. Daniel Murphy needs more seasoning and I still advocate a year at AAA to learn 2B Mr. Nady..wasn't he a Met who know has Yankee cooties? metirish Jan 11 2009 03:46 PM Source: Martinez talking to Marlins By Enrique Rojas ESPNdeportes.com SANTO DOMINGO, Domican Republic -- Pedro Martinez and the Florida Marlins are believed to be in the beginning stages of negotiating a contract and could meet next week, a source told ESPNdeportes.com Saturday night. The Marlins have spoken with Martinez's agent. Martinez, 37, has won three Cy Young awards and has a career record of 214-99, with a 2.91 ERA and 3,117 strikeouts in 17 seasons with Los Angeles, Montreal, Boston and the New York Mets. Martinez struggled last season to a 5-6 record with a 5.61 ERA with the Mets, after battling injuries and dealing with the death of his father. In his first year with the Mets, Martinez won 15 games and struck out 208 batters in 217 innings. But he has been 17-15 in the last three seasons. Martinez owns a house in Miami. Fman99 Jan 11 2009 07:52 PM ="metirish"]Source: Martinez talking to Marlins By Enrique Rojas ESPNdeportes.com SANTO DOMINGO, Domican Republic -- Pedro Martinez and the Florida Marlins are believed to be in the beginning stages of negotiating a contract and could meet next week, a source told ESPNdeportes.com Saturday night. The Marlins have spoken with Martinez's agent. Martinez, 37, has won three Cy Young awards and has a career record of 214-99, with a 2.91 ERA and 3,117 strikeouts in 17 seasons with Los Angeles, Montreal, Boston and the New York Mets. Martinez struggled last season to a 5-6 record with a 5.61 ERA with the Mets, after battling injuries and dealing with the death of his father. In his first year with the Mets, Martinez won 15 games and struck out 208 batters in 217 innings. But he has been 17-15 in the last three seasons. Martinez owns a house in Miami. Pedro really looked spent in 2008, after having a respectable September prior. I don't think he has much in the tank and I would not miss all the drama. Rockin' Doc Jan 11 2009 09:29 PM Marlins not interested in signing Pedro By Joe Frisaro / MLB.com MIAMI -- Don't look for Pedro Martinez to wind up with the Marlins. A day after a report stated the Marlins were in the mix for the 37-year-old right-hander, a league source confirmed to MLB.com on Sunday that Florida has zero interest. Reports in the Miami Herald, Palm Beach Post and SunSentinel also ruled out the possibility of Martinez joining the club. On Saturday night, a report on ESPNdeportes.com stated the Marlins had discussions with agent Fernando Cuza regarding Martinez. The report added Florida may have begun preliminary contract talks, and that the two sides were expected to continue talking this week. As of late Sunday afternoon, the Marlins were not considered a possible fit. Martinez has a home in Miami, and he has expressed privately a desire to pitch for the Marlins. On Monday, Cuza is expected to have discussions with the Mets about a possible return to New York. The right-hander also is expected to test the free-agent market. Hampered by injuries last year, Martinez was 5-6 with a 5.61 ERA in 20 starts. He threw 109 innings. Working with minimal financial resources, the Marlins are looking for affordable free agents. The team did explore adding veteran Carl Pavano, who signed with the Indians. The Marlins are prepared to head into Spring Training with a rotation that includes Josh Johnson, Ricky Nolasco, Chris Volstad, Andrew Miller and Anibal Sanchez. Nolasco, eliglbe for arbitration, still has not signed. Florida continues to explore depth at catcher. The team is looking for low-priced options there. A free agent that could be a fit is Ivan Rodriguez, but only if his price tag continues to drop this month. Frayed Knot Jan 12 2009 07:01 AM IOW, the earlier story was an agent plant. Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 08:20 AM Yeah, use the threat of the Daddy Warbucks Marlins to trigger a false bidding war. That's the ticket. Rockin' Doc Jan 12 2009 11:09 AM I think that Pedro had far more interest in the Marlins than they had in him. I believe that Pedro is desperate to play another season, but I don't think teams throughout the league are very interested in signing him. Pedro was once a dominant, HOF caliber pitcher, but he seems to be the one person that doesn't see how far removed from his former greatness he now is. metirish Jan 12 2009 11:17 AM If Pedro Martinez retired tomorrow he would surely be in the HOF at first ballot , wouldn't he? Rockin' Doc Jan 12 2009 11:21 AM I was not inferring that Pedro Martinez was not worthy of enshrinement in Coopperstown. He has had a tremendous career and was arguably one of the top 2 or 3 pitchers in MLB for several seasons. I would vote for him (if I had a vote) when his name comes up on the HOF ballot. I was simply stating that he is not nearly the dominant pitcher he once was. Edgy DC Jan 12 2009 11:22 AM I think he's pretty aware of what happened last year. If he didn't still believe he could turn it around, he wouldn't be the great pitcher he is. What's more, I believe he could turn it around. In his prime, he had an unprecedented four killer pitches, so it's not like he was fastball-reliant. It's a matter of finding what he can do with what's left of his fastball and using it to complement the rest of his arsenal. That's a far ways from saying he will return to a productive level, but I'm certain he can. Glavine continued to pitch effectively with a powder puff fastball and a change. While his control was still very good, Pedro's has always been even better. And if I'm the Mets, I'm willing to spend some change to find out. Giving him Redding's money with an automatically vesting bonus year of $9 million if he gets 180 innings? Yeah, go for it. I'm certain he can do as well as Redding in 2009, and a damn fine bet to do better. The only thing Redding has over him is a better doctor's report. metirish Jan 12 2009 05:05 PM Michael Young wants out of Texas , can play 2nd base. I should add that Heyman just said on the Hot stove that he has %62 million left on his big contract. smg58 Jan 12 2009 05:22 PM Young's expensive, and the dropoff in his numbers over the past three years has been precipitous. Even if they took Castillo it would still be a $10M payroll hit, and he's just not that good anymore. Frayed Knot Jan 15 2009 01:14 PM Dodgers reportedly to release Andruw before today is out Benjamin Grimm Jan 15 2009 01:52 PM Wow. He's horrendously overpaid, but they're going to have to eat that contract anyway. Is there no hope of him having a bounceback year? Someone will be able to pick him up for minimum wage, and they may get a hell of a bargain at the Dodgers expense. metirish Jan 15 2009 01:56 PM Jones was on MLB Network the other night talking about how he would love to go back to the Braves. Edgy DC Jan 15 2009 02:01 PM No doubt. metsmarathon Jan 15 2009 02:28 PM i'd give andruw a shot, for minimum wage... Frayed Knot Jan 15 2009 05:45 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":2v9kwf3v]Wow. He's horrendously overpaid, but they're going to have to eat that contract anyway. Is there no hope of him having a bounceback year?[/quote:2v9kwf3v] I guess not enough of a chance in their minds to make carrying him all year worth it. They restructured his deal last week with a release in mind so I assume they're going to do similar thing to what we did with Bonilla (only on a much bigger scale): pay out the remainder over a long period to avoid getting hit with it all at once. Benjamin Grimm Jan 23 2009 08:34 AM The Philadelphia Inquirer is reporting today that the Phillies are aggressively trying to sign Moises Alou. metirish Jan 23 2009 08:36 AM Would Alou be a starter there or would he be in a limited role , who's in the outfield there along with Ibanez?...Dobbs?....Victorino? John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 23 2009 08:37 AM Watch him hit .500 and stay healthy all year. Bastard. Frayed Knot Jan 23 2009 08:44 AM He wouldn't start there - but he'd be a potentially good RH bat off the bench for a predominately lefty hitting squad. Benjamin Grimm Jan 23 2009 08:51 AM The three options (Perez, Wolf, and Sheets) may be soon reduced to two: ="MLB.com":2t16pb69]The deep freeze that's been the Major League free-agent market this winter has shown indications a thaw is coming -- at least for starting pitchers. On the heels of the Mets reaching an apparent agreement on a Minor League deal with right-hander Freddy Garcia, it looks like the Dodgers have taken the inside track in the competition for lefty starter Randy Wolf's services. According to sources for FoxSports.com, Wolf could most likely be signed to a one or two-year deal. Wolf previously pitched for Los Angeles in 2007 and was 12-12 with a 4.30 ERA in a combined 33 starts last season for the Padres and Astros. FoxSports.com said Wolf would get less than the three-year, $28 million offer the pitcher turned down from Houston earlier this winter. [/quote:2t16pb69] metsguyinmichigan Jan 23 2009 08:57 AM Supposedly, Sheets is meeting with the Rangers. metirish Jan 23 2009 08:58 AM Wolf turned down an offer for that much? , and I was thinking he could be had for a song on a one year deal. sharpie Jan 23 2009 08:58 AM Fine. I actually saw Wolf pitch twice last year, at the only game I attended at MFY Stadium and at the game I attended at Petco. Both time he got shellacked. smg58 Jan 23 2009 09:34 AM There are a number of available starters who can give you at least a league average ERA, several of whom have the upside to do significantly better. Randy Wolf is not one of them. I see no point in pursuing a demonstrably inferior pitcher just because he's a lefty. Edgy DC Jan 23 2009 09:59 AM I don't think anybody but Wally Matthews is arguing that his leftiness is important, and Wally is only throwing that pitch to drum up "Mets Gotta Steal Pettitte" angles. Who do you have your eye on? metirish Jan 23 2009 08:11 PM Just turned over to MLB Network after watching "What Not To Wear" and heard Tom Verducci say that Perez is moving closer to signing with the Mets. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 23 2009 08:59 PM Here's the source: Jon "Boras Boy" Heyman ]Mets extend offer to Perez, their top target The Mets have placed an offer on the table for free-agent lefthander Oliver Perez, SI.com has learned, and are hopeful to have an answer in coming days regarding their prime pitching target. The Mets are believed to have improved their original thought, which was for about $30 million over three years. But it isn't certain what their latest offer is. Perez remains the Mets' top choice for the final spot in their rotation, though the team has remained in contact with three other free-agent pitchers -- Randy Wolf, Jon Garland and Ben Sheets. They know they'd have competition for Wolf (Dodgers), Garland (Diamondbacks) and Sheets (Rangers, possibly Yankees) but aren't sure what other teams are competing for Perez. The Mets had been hopeful to land free agent Derek Lowe earlier but were surprised when the rival Braves outbid them by $24 million, landing Lowe with a $60-million, four-year contract. Perez, 27, is eight years younger than Lowe, though not quite as consistent. Mets GM Omar Minaya would love to import Perez, so the Mets are not likely to take one of the other pitchers unless he feels his chances for Perez are gone. Nymr83 Jan 24 2009 12:14 PM I hope "the mystery team" comes and raises perez's price too high so we can sign Sheets. Then Boras and Perez can admit there was no mystery team and we get both at a reduced rate! MFS62 Jan 24 2009 01:21 PM If money is the issue, I'd like to see the Mets sign Sheets and with any Ollie Perez money left over, go out and sign Odalis Perez. His ERA was only .10 worse than Ollie's last year, is still only 32 years old, and probably be signed for far less money than any of the other names that have been in the press lately. Later MFS62 Jan 24 2009 01:21 PM Oops. Dupe Sorry Later seawolf17 Jan 30 2009 01:00 PM Varitek back to Boston for one year, $5 million. Frayed Knot Jan 30 2009 02:36 PM Varitek's (read: Boras's) threat to sit out the season and/or retire didn't get the Sox to budge I see. Tek is one of several who turned down arbitration offers this winter only to wind up not only with a much smaller deal than arb would have snagged him but didn't get the multi-year deal either. Now it's hope you play well and the economy improves when you can do the same dance next year. Ashie62 Feb 02 2009 03:56 PM Anyone for Varitek via trade and a pay raise? Fman99 Feb 02 2009 07:27 PM ="Ashie62":2t5ssjz6]Anyone for Varitek via trade and a pay raise?[/quote:2t5ssjz6] .220 metirish Feb 02 2009 07:43 PM Is that his weight or his average? , sucks either way though. metirish Feb 04 2009 11:35 AM ]Left-hander Chase Wright was traded by the New York Yankees to the Milwaukee Brewers on Wednesday for outfielder-catcher Eric Fryer. metirish Feb 07 2009 02:23 PM Andruw Jones turns down non-roster spring training invite from the MFY's. Rockin' Doc Feb 07 2009 05:10 PM metirish - "Andruw Jones turns down non-roster spring training invite from the MFY's." Good to see that Jones has his pride. Better to go unsigned than sell one's soul by possibly donning a Yankee uniform. I suddenly have a new sense of respect for Jones. MFS62 Feb 08 2009 07:35 AM ="Rockin' Doc":2e2xwbch]metirish - "Andruw Jones turns down non-roster spring training invite from the MFY's." Good to see that Jones has his pride. Better to go unsigned than sell one's soul by possibly donning a Yankee uniform. I suddenly have a new sense of respect for Jones.[/quote:2e2xwbch] B'sides, they couldn't have the signing photo op soon anyhow. They'd first have to send out Cecil Fielder's uni to have the seams let out to fit Jones. Later Frayed Knot Feb 08 2009 08:45 PM Andruw to the Rangers - apparently gets a ML deal for low-end money (500K) plus incentives. 15mil to practically minimum wage in one year is tough to do. Fman99 Feb 09 2009 06:44 AM ="Frayed Knot":1zv55w66]Andruw to the Rangers - apparently gets a ML deal for low-end money (500K) plus incentives. 15mil to practically minimum wage in one year is tough to do.[/quote:1zv55w66] Yeah, poor guy. My heart breaks for him. /sarcasm Edgy DC Feb 09 2009 07:07 AM It's not like he doesn't get to keep the 15 miills. Vic Sage Feb 09 2009 09:08 AM yeah, i mean basically he just got a raise! Frayed Knot Feb 09 2009 09:26 AM Sure, it just shows a helluva difference between what someone thought he was worth last year vs what they think he's worth barely a year later. How the mighty (and fat) have fallen.

="Rockin' Doc":sf7zf4o4]The Mets should give Lowe and Borass a few days to respond, then if they don't get a response that looks favorable they should offer Oliver Perez an offer in the neighborhood of 4 years for $36 mil. and tell Boras that the first accept will get the one rotation slot available. I would love to see a few of Boras' high profile clients get stuck because of his blustering and posturing. I believe Manny Ramirez just may be the one to lose big because of Boras overplaying his hand in these difficult financial times.[/quote:sf7zf4o4] i would love to play Boras' clients against each other by making reasonable offers to both pitchers and say its first come first served. this puts Boras in a position where he can't do right by both clients. MFS62 Dec 31 2008 06:42 AM Now we're going to find out if Omar has friends in Lowe places. Later Edgy DC Dec 31 2008 07:15 AM ="Nymr83":jqmfi9t3]i would love to play Boras' clients against each other by making reasonable offers to both pitchers and say its first come first served. this puts Boras in a position where he can't do right by both clients.[/quote:jqmfi9t3] Well, he can advise them both to hold out for more. I'm not saying it'll work, but he's got a corner of the market by holding the best two remaining pitchers. Benjamin Grimm Dec 31 2008 07:19 AM I notice the article says the Mets don't want to guarantee more than three years. My prediction: They'll sign him to a deal that guarantees $39 million over three years, with a clause that gets him a fourth year (at another $13 million) based on some innings pitched criteria. An article in the Daily News this morning said that the Mets were the lone remaining suitor. I don't know if that's true or not, but if it is Boras will, of course, try to get them to bid against the mysterious phantom team. metirish Dec 31 2008 07:23 AM Thankfully Minaya is't Cashman who at this point with no other suitors would sweeten the pot by at least $60 million. soupcan Dec 31 2008 07:50 AM I'd love to see Boras get his comeuppance as well but it just doesn't happen. We all thought the A-Rod opt-out would backfire and that certainly did not. Boras turned that around from a disaster to friggin' no-holds barrred success. Boras is a smart guy - he knows exactly what he is doing and always gets the most for his clients. As a fan I hate him, but if I were an athlete he'd be my guy. Edgy DC Dec 31 2008 08:03 AM I'm perfectly happy seeing Boras clients walk off with all the money they can get --- as long as my team drives a harder bargain than everybody else's. He got the Yankees to bid against themselves to pay Alex Rodriguez more, even though everybody hates the guy? I applaud him. Frayed Knot Dec 31 2008 08:09 AM ="soupcan":388olj2s]I'd love to see Boras get his comeuppance as well but it just doesn't happen.[/quote:388olj2s] It does occasionally. A couple years back he was telling anyone who would listen that he had a multiple 5-year offers for Kenvin Millwood at something like $15 per. Millwood eventually settled for a one-year arbitration settlement for around $10 or so. And there have been others as well - usually with smaller/mid-range clients. It's the big boys who generate most of the publicity and those are the ones he hits on - but, of course, it's a lot easier when you've got the goods. What remains to be seen here is whether this year is going to be a downward trend after several years of rapidly rising salaries like happened a few years ago following the 1999-2001 spending boom. So far the only player for whom there was a serious bidding war was Teixeira. Sabathia certainly got a chunk of change but it's not clear whether than was necessary, and guys like F Rodriguez got a whole lot less than what was suspected even 2-3 months ago. Centerfield Dec 31 2008 08:24 AM ="soupcan":1gdt0nu9]As a fan I hate him, but if I were an athlete he'd be my guy.[/quote:1gdt0nu9] Why do you hate him as a fan? As an owner or GM, he might be the scum of the earth, but do fans really have a rooting interest in negotiations between player and team? metsmarathon Dec 31 2008 08:41 AM i only hate him when players i want the mets to get have him as their agent, and that drags out the process of signing said player, and typically means that, if we do get said player, its at a higher cost and because we offered the most money (as opposed to the fictional world i wish to live in where free agents choose the mets not for the most money but because they're the awesomest destination, and do so cheaply and before christmas). soupcan Dec 31 2008 08:45 AM ="Centerfield"]="soupcan"]As a fan I hate him, but if I were an athlete he'd be my guy. Why do you hate him as a fan? As an owner or GM, he might be the scum of the earth, but do fans really have a rooting interest in negotiations between player and team? I suppose its not him I hate but rather the escalating salaries that continue to move the players and the game farther away from the fan. As a fan though - the higher the salary, the higher the operating costs of the team, the higher the cost of watching or going to a game. Edgy DC Dec 31 2008 08:50 AM ="soupcan":f7bp71p6]As a fan though - the higher the salary, the higher the operating costs of the team, the higher the cost of watching or going to a game.[/quote:f7bp71p6] I don't believe that for a minute. Prices are driven by demand, not by salary expenses. Don't let the owners convince you otherwise Centerfield Dec 31 2008 09:08 AM ="soupcan"]="Centerfield"]="soupcan"]As a fan I hate him, but if I were an athlete he'd be my guy. Why do you hate him as a fan? As an owner or GM, he might be the scum of the earth, but do fans really have a rooting interest in negotiations between player and team? I suppose its not him I hate but rather the escalating salaries that continue to move the players and the game farther away from the fan. As a fan though - the higher the salary, the higher the operating costs of the team, the higher the cost of watching or going to a game. So you're saying you don't hate the playa, you hate the game. Benjamin Grimm Dec 31 2008 09:14 AM One reason not to like Boras: He represents Mike Pelfrey. If Pelfrey continues to develop into the pitcher we'd like him to be, we have little to no hope that he'll sign a contract like Wright and Reyes did. He'll do the arbitration thing each year that he can, and then he'll test the market. It makes it just a teeny bit harder to get attached to a home-grown player. attgig Dec 31 2008 10:29 AM ="Edgy DC":6u8g9kac]="soupcan":6u8g9kac]As a fan though - the higher the salary, the higher the operating costs of the team, the higher the cost of watching or going to a game.[/quote:6u8g9kac] I don't believe that for a minute. Prices are driven by demand, not by salary expenses. Don't let the owners convince you otherwise[/quote:6u8g9kac] not only demand, but supply. all these new ballparks have less seats. friggin owners. BUT, I would love to see how ticket prices changed from before Free Agency to the early nineties (when contracts started going into the millions). soupcan Dec 31 2008 10:58 AM ="Edgy DC":2ijnmyx6]="soupcan":2ijnmyx6]As a fan though - the higher the salary, the higher the operating costs of the team, the higher the cost of watching or going to a game.[/quote:2ijnmyx6] I don't believe that for a minute. Prices are driven by demand, not by salary expenses. Don't let the owners convince you otherwise[/quote:2ijnmyx6] I don't mean to say that salaries are the only thing but they are a significant contributing factor. ="Centerfield":2ijnmyx6]So you're saying you don't hate the playa, you hate the game.[/quote:2ijnmyx6] Word. Edgy DC Dec 31 2008 11:14 AM ="soupcan":osy3ctu2]I don't mean to say that salaries are the only thing but they are a significant contributing factor.[/quote:osy3ctu2] I don't think they mean a thing. All the restraints of a salary cap haven't made basketball and football tickets any more affordable. soupcan Dec 31 2008 11:29 AM ="Edgy DC":r44vyrx7]="soupcan":r44vyrx7]I don't mean to say that salaries are the only thing but they are a significant contributing factor.[/quote:r44vyrx7] I don't think they mean a thing. All the restraints of a salary cap haven't made basketball and football tickets any more affordable.[/quote:r44vyrx7] It's not like their salary caps have kept those other sports salaries low either though. Frayed Knot Dec 31 2008 12:07 PM Not low, but lower than they'd be under a true open market -- and yet the NFL with its hard cap and often elusive FA system has still managed to be the sport to virtually invent and exploit things like seat licensing and mandatory pre-season buys.

I voted for Lowe but thats only based on who I'd rather have for 2009. If we're talking about a longterm deal (which it will likely take to get any of these guys) I'd rather have the younger Perez.

sounds good to me, lets see what happens