Gwreck

#14 debuted tonight: 1993 World Series Game 6 (the Joe Carter game). Mitch Williams and Joe Carter joined Costas and Verducci for the commentary on this one, which I was not a fan of. Williams reminds me of Joe Morgan's style of analysis, in that it never fails to come off as if you're listening to a pompous blowhard. In some aspects, Williams is less annoying, perhaps because there hasn't been enough familiarity to build sufficent contempt. In some aspects, however, Williams is far more annoying, as listening to the pomposity of a marginal player is much more grating than when it comes from an all-time great. Carter was much more reserved, and I got the impression he just wanted to keep asking Mitch "where did that ball land again?" every time Williams went off. Lots of Met content in the game, with future Mets Olerud, Alomar and Henderson and former Met Tony Fernandez all in the Jays starting lineup. Al Leiter also makes a relief appearance. On the Phillies side, you have Dave West and Roger Mason in relief, and the much-more-familiar Lenny Dykstra as the leadoff batter. -- I enjoy the suspense of each game on the countdown being revealed one at a time, so it was a surprise to see a promo for next week's game (#13) already -- it will be 1997 World Series Game 7, also known as Al Leiter's last start for the Marlins before being traded to the Mets.

Edgy DC wrote: (I tend to think the captain argument is a non-starter.) Ding ding ding! We have a winner. The "who is going to be captain" is a fans' issue only. I suppose there's something appealing about having your gritty white homegrown star with a "C" on his uniform but short of mollifying the masses there's little use for it otherwise.

I've got a tip for Alex, and anyone else who doesn't like being on TV: don't go to public events in large stadia that are being televised with about 500 cameras.

The name on the stadium is actually the least likely thing to change. With all of their cash flow problems, they are not going to turn away the millions of dollars they get each year for the naming rights.

Still waiting for some Met content on this series (I figure we get one game in the top 5, plus probably one other representation in the list somewhere). They did have David Cone (starter in that game for the MFYs) mentioning how Davey affected his pitching style. Also commenting on the game was Lou Piniella, and the broadcast expanded to 90 minutes, all of which were good additions.

I think LWFS' strategy for K-Rod usage is both a smart baseball decision and a winning argument should a grievance be filed, should they decide to do so for the entire season. New manager, new GM, new strategy for the year would should -- even if the Mets knew they would be saving bucks by doing so -- that their strategy was a good-faith one designed to win ballgames and not to simply deny a player a chance at an incentive. --- Cot's contracts specifies that there is also a health clause, that "doctors" must deem Rodriguez "healthy" after the 2011 season for the option to vest.

Jerry DiPoto

I haven't read the complaint yet, but my initial reaction from the Press Statements is that they seem to contradict Jeff Wilpon's prior contentions that estimates of the Mets' losses were inaccurate or overstated. According to the press statement, the Sterling entities had "over $500 million" in Madoff accounts that was lost.

Conspicuously absent from that article: that Vernon Wells is also a well-below-average centerfielder. I suppose his CF expiration date may be a year or two past Carlos' but it's not a huge difference.

Ceetar wrote: http://www.twitter.com/jose_thole Did Josh choose this twitter handle to curry favor with Omar? After all, we all know he prefers Latino players. (In all seriousness, it's twitter.com/josh_thole).

That Bonilla's deferred payments were invested with Madoff is not new; that rumor was around a while ago but never confirmed.

Frayed Knot wrote: Anytime anyone slips out of the icy grip of the four-letter network I consider it a good thing. This also (and not coincidentally) moves him out of the realm of "insider" pay interweb. Rob Neyer has been free (and out from behind the ESPN "Insider" paywall) for something like the past 2 years.

Edgy DC wrote: Kent and Viz went together from the Mets to Cleveland. They subsequently played together on the Giants, Dodgers, and Astros. Kent and Vizcaino were together in two of those trades: Mets to Cleveland (for Baerga and Espinoza) Cleveland to San Francisco (for Matt Williams).

batmagadanleadoff wrote: As to the Mets having one of 2011's highest payrolls, the Mets were already committed to most of it before Sandy was hired. They've added very little payroll since, underspent on last year's draft, and haven't re-signed Jose Reyes. So you can spin the Mets payroll more ways than one. That's a good point. The most accurate way to describe the Mets' budget is probably "capped." It's indisputable that they are spending a large quantity of money, a good deal of which is not returning much value, and accordingly, they aren't exactly spending even more on top of that already-large sum. (This level of accuracy doesn't make a good soundbite, however).

Jon Niese's 28-batter 1-hitter (which also featured a triple play turned by the Padres) was probably the best game of the year for the Mets.

Frayed Knot did quite a bit of analysis of it (as posted in this forum) but there doesn't seem to be a link to the list itself. Where is it hiding?

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: as lazy as Meche That's a strange definition of "lazy" that you've got there. Nah, he said himself his heart wasn't in it to rehab That's not what he said. The accurate quote is "If it�s not in my heart to keep playing, to keep pushing to pitch, I had to do what I had to do." I guess you can spin that as "laziness" but it's a strange definition, particularly when considering -- as he so clearly did -- both the money he had already made and the likelihood (ie. low) of him ever being an effective major league pitcher again.

Ceetar wrote: I wonder if keeping the numbers sealed helps them work out a settlement out of court? It has no effect. The only thing that "unsealing" numbers would do would be to expose them to new, additional liability (presumably for breaking a confidentiality agreement).

Ceetar wrote: as lazy as Meche That's a strange definition of "lazy" that you've got there.

Ceetar wrote: Wonder who holds the option for the third Dickey year. As reported above, the team.

The Star Ledger is reporting via twitter that the Mets and Dickey have reached a multi-year deal, "details to follow." The Daily News has it as a two-year deal, with a club option for a third.

As far as "relevance" goes it would be harder (so much so that no other popular music artist has in the past 20 years) to draw a greater size and diversity of world-wide fanbase than U2 has. Of course, there's no accounting for taste in that calculus.

Frayed Knot wrote: So a statement in mid-2009 has to also hold true in early 2011 (and presumably for all time and ever and ever) in order to not be cast as a lie? No, of course not, as I clarified in a follow-up post. But it certainly is significant that their denial of the need to sell was so vehement just a short while ago.

Ceetar wrote: [Does this really count as selling? Yes. Had Dave Howard made those same statements under oath, you wouldn't be now able to convict him of perjury -- but it's clearly a big shift from what their position was 16 months ago.

Didn't Dave Howard angrily deny the Mets would sell back in August 2009? Yes. Yes he did. I believe he called claims that the Wilpons would sell was "flat-out wrong," "false," "irresponsible," "very disturbing," "outrageous" and "unfounded" noting that the team was "not for sale, in whole or in part."