nymr83

yahoo didnt transfer all our settings from last year as i thought it had. if you happen to check the site you'll see some changes i'm making to the rules. these arent new rules, just bringing everything into line with last year.

can he be sent there without his permission?

I think the balance will already have tilted if the Mets have a better hitter who is kept off the roster because of him. He is pretty much worthless defensively as he only plays one position and thats a position the mets are set at. He is of no use as a pinch-runner eiher, so his usefulness is entirely in his bat. Do the Mets have a better hitter right now? I'd say Ben Johnson is definetaly a guy I'd rather have around. If he's going to miss the roster (taking Newhan for versatility and carrying 12 pitchers) then Franco should be gone instead.

]Mgmt obviously likes Franco or mgmt doesnt like admitting that a 2 year deal to a 46 year old wasnt the brightest move?

well thats the point, wright can do better. And i don't expect LoDuca to repeat last year's .318/.355/.428 either, he hadn't had a season that good since 2001. a more reasonable expectation might be his career line of .290/.341/.419....not a big dropoff really, but not what i'd like to see from my #2 hitter.

i fully support batting wright 2nd. going into last year i wanted him 3rd but after beltran's huge year i wouldnt want to tamper with him at all. having someone with more patience than loduca probably benefits reyes as well... though one moght wonder if he'll be red-lighted a bit more often with wright at the plate.

If Delgado is out for the year (or a large part of it) at any point i think the Mets would look to acquire someone rather than play Green at 1B or rely on Julio Franco or Michel Abreu. The question is what happens if he misses a month or so? I'd be inclined to bring up Abreu and have him split time with Green. Abreu is too old to be a prospect and is a veteran of the Cuban league...if he can't help the big club this year when will he?

I would think Delgado is a more inviting target, he is more likely to hurt you at the plate and less likely to do so on the basepaths.

i thought it was an attempt at humor and i laughed. i hate P.C. too, but I don't think theres anything politically incorrect about liking Wright, clearly the better (though probably not the more 'exciting') player, more than Reyes,

Edgy DC wrote: Singing Jose is more fun when the PA doesn't ram it down our throats. yeah. the organization really ruined what started out as a fun thing by the fans.

Wright was the easy choice for me. Reyes was BAD before 2006, if Reyes and Wright both repeat their '06 numbers in '07 I'd be pretty close to changing my mind, but I'm not sure thats going to happen.

Milledge is 21 years old. In my opinion (and i cant prove or disprove it) the most important thing for his development is every-day at-bats. He'd be the first guy i called on if any of the starting outfielders got hurt, but i'd leave him at AAA until the team feels ready to play him ever day in the majors.

why retire with a 54 ERA though? retire now and be the answer to trivia questions.

Wouldn't Reyes get moved to 2B again? Isn't this the dumbest speculation ever?

Tony Piazza? Pedro E Martinez? where are all the real prospects? starting off in big-boy camp even if they are destined to spend the season at low-A?

1) Games Wright 2) Hits Reyes 3) Doubles Beltran 4) Triples Reyes 5) Home runs Delgado 6) RBI Delgado 7) Stolen Bases Reyes 8) Caught stealing Reyes 9) Runs scored Reyes 10) Batting average Wright 11) On base percentage Wright 12) Slugging percentage Delgado 13) OPS Beltran 14) Strikeouts (most by a batter) Delgado 15) Walks (most by a batter) Wright 16) Wins Glavine 17) Losses Glavine 18) Strikeouts Glavine 19) Walks Glavine 20) ERA (low) Wagner 21) ERA (high) Hernandez 22) Saves Wagner 23) BAA (low) Wagner 24) BAA (high) Glavine 25) Games started Glavine 26) Games pitched Heilman 27) Innings Pitched Glavine Player-Specific Predictions Predict the player's specific stats in the category selected. Two points if someone guesses the number exactly. If no one gets the exact number, one point will go to the people who are the closest to the actual result, either over or under. 28) Jose Reyes: OBP .341 29) Jose Reyes: SB 54 30) Paul LoDuca: BA .269 31) Paul LoDuca: Games 110 32) Carlos Beltran: HR 34 33) Carlos Beltran: SB 24 34) Carlos Delgado: HR 42 35) Carlos Delgado: K 110 36) David Wright: RBI 104 37) David Wright: OPS 903 38) Moises Alou: Games 130 39) Moises Alou: BA .310 40) Shawn Green: Games 121 41) Shawn Green: HR 22 42) Jose Valentin: K 81 43) Jose Valentin: BA .260 44) Endy Chavez: Games 100 45) Endy Chavez: OBP .333 46) Julio Franco: BA .250 47) Tom Glavine: IP 181 48) Tom Glavine: W 15 49) Orlando Hernandez: Games Started 16 50) Orlando Hernandez: ERA 4.80 51) Oliver Perez: K 100 52) Oliver Perez: ERA 4.32 53) John Maine: W 14 54) John Maine: ERA 3.90 55) Billy Wagner: Saves 41 56) Aaron Heilman: ERA 3.51 57) Duaner Sanchez: IP 65 58) Scott Schoenweis: ERA 4.10 59) Chan Ho Park: Games Started 8 60) Mike Pelfrey: IP 120 61) Phillip Humber: IP 120 62) Pedro Martinez: Games Started 8 Name the top five Mets pitchers in Games Started in 2007. One point for each one named correctly. A bonus of five points for getting all five correct 63) Glavine 64) Maine 65) Pelfrey 66) Hernandez 67) Park Team Categories 68)Total runs scored 854 69)Total runs against 783 70)Team ERA 4.50 71)Team batting average .266 72)Record 91-71 73)NL East Finish (1st, 2nd, etc.) 1st 74)Games behind NL East Winner 0, division winners 75)Playoffs (Division winner, Wildcard winner, no playoffs) division winner 76)Playoff finish - (Win WS, Lose WS, Lose NLCS, Lose NLDS, no playoffs) Win WS

]It's part of the reason it took them so long to re-orient themselves in the direction of winning baseball. they were still the quickest team to win a WS from its entry into the league until the Marlins.

thats what i'll end up setting it for if nobody wants to debate the subject, i dont really have a strong preference myself.

its 7-5 (only 11 people in the league though)....so now that we want a cap what should it be? 162x9 would be 1458....does anyone object to a cap of 1450?

yeah, an IP cap is something that can change the formula, but only if that cap is a significant one...a cap low enough to stop you from filling all your pitching slots (minus two for closers) with starters. i havent seen a cap that low. 1250 with 7 pitchers (yahoo's standards) won't do that at all. if you give the 2 closers 75 ip each that leaves 1100 for 5 starters or 220 innings each.... i think you'd be hard pressed to throw that many innings with 5 guys even if you spent your first 5 draft picks on starters. the inning cap really only prevents the frequent exchanging of starters.

too few teams, and i'd say 12 is too few for a league with all MLB players, leads to all-star rosters and does not reward people for their knowledge and ability to find depth. i consider 10-12 optimal for NL-only leagues and 16-18 for combined leagues...i've never done an AL league but i'd assume you'd want to keep those at 10 due to 2 less mlb teams. at the very least i'd like to get to 14 teams edit- mods, feel free to move this thread as anyone who logs on semi-regularly has probably seen it by now.

cooby wrote: Just my two cents on middle relievers, if they get lots of K's in few innings, I found them to be a good thing to have. I forget who I had last year, but he had maybe 1 1/3 innings every night and usually at least 2 strike outs. A very good player for me. but K/9 isn't a category, if you wanted K's you'd be better off with the starter who goes 5 and K's 3. Similiarly, in response to metsmarathon, you'd get MORE wins with another starter, so unless you have such great starters already that you are uncatchable in wins you are hurting yourself in wins by putting a reliever in there. the only situation where i could see myself wanting a middle reliever is late in the season if i'm already way ahead in wins and k's and want to keep my era/whip from blowing up. obviously this doesnt include guys who i think are going to change roles...we have a bench after all and i think we're discussing when you'd want to play your relievers not when you'd want to roster them.

i'm not sure and since i'm in i have no way of testing it, but the league ID and password should work. thanks.

unless you are worried about the ERA/WHIP effects of a poor starter, yes.

thats a self-serving argument if i ever heard one. besides, the intial balloting is done by writers, what the heck would be the point of then passing the failures onto another group of writers? if anything, the veterans committee serves the purpose of letting the players put into the hall those guys who they consider hall-worthy that for whatever reason arent in the thought process of a writer.