nymr83

cleonjones11 wrote: I would think Ron hiy by pitch Hunt would leadoff . Ed K should be flattered Lolich? Maybe they weighed his ass? Ron Hunt led th eleague in HBP 7 years in a row (a feat Biggio couldnt even match) and was one hit 50 times... i have a feeling the "attempt to get out of the way" rule or the "its a strike if you're over the plate" rule werent enforced even then.

iramets wrote: I just happened upon the identity of the Mets' leadoff batter throughout early September of 1963 (while researching for cleanup hitters who had as few HRs as Ricky Ledee)--would you believe Casey thought Ed Kranepool would do well in the leadoff spot? This was NOT a one time freak thing--he put Kranepool in the leadoff spot every day for almost two straight weeks. looking at that team i'm not sure who should have led off, 2B Ron Hunt would be my choice based on the stats (with Thomas and Snider 3-4 and Jim Hickman 2nd) but they're all so bad that it probably doesnt matter

ok, I think Edgy wins. If you haven't heard of the coliseum in Rome you should be shot to help raise society's collective IQ.

metirish wrote: I swear I didn't see that silly quote before I posted,and it's debatable as to weather it's the most famous stadium in the world..... I'd put Fenway and Wrigley in the same category. Madison Square Garden though is definetaly better known than any of them.

i'd love to see Wright, Reyes, Beltran, Delgado, and a few pitchers on the squad and Jeter the lone yankee voted in (or better yet, an injured jeter and no yankees)

I read that in The Post this morning, I was pretty suprised to hear that out of Glavine who is or at least was a union rep for his team.

Glavine, Maine, Perez, Hernandez...the Mets will put off deciding on a 5th starter until needed and will then choose Humber over Pelfrey...they will claim the decision was based solely on who was on "normal rest" at the time

in fairness, I'd rather be called the "red bulls" or "bulls" than the "metro stars" (which i'm sure becomes "metros.")

Youkilis was originally a 3B

I'd hardly consider Drew a lock to repeat that number, but Helton is a great hitter and Fenway has always been good to lefties.

]I wonder if anyone's done a study comparing, say, the ratios of ERA of starting pitchers to relievers today and thirty years ago. Do you suppose it would show that modern relievers are closer in quality to the modern starters than relievers were in the past? It doesn't seem to me that this is necessarily true, but it might be. What do you think? What's the big advantage pushing this trend in today's game? I'm sure today's relievers look better than the relievers of 50 yers ago, but thats becaise today pitchers are groomed for that role while back then the bullpen were the guys not good enough to be starters

we've got 9 votes on each poll at this point, we should probably wait and see if anyone else trickles in. meanwhile, anything else that needs a vote? lets hold off any talk about roster size until we know for sure who is playing and who is not.

what exactly do you hate about cops? i think they treated peavy quite fairly. edit- now my question looks like it came out of left field. for the record the original title of the thread was "i hate cops"

LOL

Hamels is probably a better bet than either of our guys, and thats not a knock on them.

metirish wrote: I'll play if it's daily..I just hated the weekly thing last season, thus I had little interest after a while. FYI, it was DAILY last year.

]�This is a message to anyone who thinks they can impersonate a press person and sneak in,� he said. �We take this seriously and if anybody else tries it, they�ll get the same result.� They'll get let go with nothing but a promise to stay away from Shea? I'm scared.

The problem here is obvious. Players need to impregnate their wives during Spring Training so that the birth will be safely tucked away in December. If Delgado is expecting when he is he obviously knocked her up during the All-Star break, another reason to get rid of that embarrasing game. SC=high for those dopes who couldn't tell

Should there be a cap on team innings pitched? The amount of the cap will be decided if we get a "yes", I think Vic's (162 games x 9 innings) is a good idea.

Should lineups be setable every day or once per week?

ok, I'm starting a poll on Transactions: Weekly or Daily. I'm also starting a poll on an innings cap: Yes or No... the details of the cap will be worked out if we get a yes but Vic's suggestion is a very solid one and I'd hope we can agree on it. ON EDIT- I should mention that anyone who isn't A) in the league and pretty sure they're staying or wishing to enter the league, should please refrain from voting.

] I like abogdan's suggestion about a weekly waiver for add/drops as a sort of middle ground between weekly and daily leagues. As far as i know this isn't possible on Yahoo. The waiver period can be set to a certain length of days, but I don't think it can be set to "on sundays" or anything like that, and even if it could you would still have all the free agents who arent on waivers available all week long. I know of two "work arounds" to this, but neither is really fair or fun-- 1. I "lock" everyone from making add/drop transactions (but not roster moves) every sunday at midnight, and I don't unlock them until the following saturday at midnight....the huge downside to this is that people who arent on at midnight (or whatever time we choose) are just as screwed as they would be all week. 2. honor system not to make moves all week- this simply won't work, someone will put something in at 11:59 and we'll either have to be assholes and not give them the player or we'll have to contend with the guy who makes a move at 11:58 the next week. If the above is wrong and Yahoo will in fact let you set ALL free agents to only be picked up one day a week please let me know, but last i checked you couldn't.

I read somewhere that another problem in the negotiations was over how much (if anything) the Giants would owe him if he became unavailable at any point during the season do to legal proceedings stemming from the whole BALCO mess.

i agree that an innings-cap is a better solution, and it was roundly shot-down last year. i'd like to have onen place that prevented the "strategy" we discussed above without preventing any legitimate draft strategies...in other words, if someone drafted all the starters and relievers who end up top 10 in innings, they still wouldnt run into the cap. i dont want anyone looking at the cap in August and saying "gee i better trade a starter for a reliever or i'll smack that ceiling"

indeed.