stevejrogers

="AG/DC"]Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view. Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over. Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership. I'm sure baseball (the only sport where players are allowed to come and go from the "sidelines" as they please) history is FILLED with such examples of Hernandez's not wanting to see an excruciating end to one hell of a season. The Mets win Game 6 of 1999 NLCS on the other hand, the card game would never be brought up at all.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Nice enough stadium, amenity-wise, that's airplane-hanger like from the outside and has a lot of bad seats way up high due to the roof. The experience there was strange as when I went at least, there was no loyalty to the home team since they were new and everyone who lives in Phoenix is from Cleveland or Chicago or Mexico. Favorite story, don't know how true it would be now, but Todd Pratt in 2000 started a game out in Arizona and was greeted by the usual polite boos associated with any visitor, rather than the chorus that oh...greets Yadier Molina at Shea Stadium. The guy effectively ended the DBack's first ever trip to the postseason and hardly anyone knew who he was!

="Frayed Knot"]] Keith & Mitchell in clubhouse while '86 playoff game going on = cute, funny story because team eventually won Rickey & Bobby in clubhouse while '99 playoff game going on = not caring bastards because team eventually lost While I agree with the general point, there are differences, -Hernandez often makes the point that after making the second out he was so damn disgusted that he just couldn't stand to be in the dugout and watch the season end (though it showed a lack of faith in Gary Carter) as opposed to the infamous card game where legend has it neither man knew of the outcome of the game until their dejected teammates started coming into the clubhouse. -Mitchell plainly wasn't expecting himself to be used at all and was doing something that he would have no other real time to do, book the next available flight to San Diego ASAP. You can kind of make a case that he was doing something worthwhile with his time at that moment. As opposed to playing a game of cards. AG/DC May 02 2008 08:28 PM Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view. Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over. DocTee May 02 2008 09:51 PM It's worth a visit , pricey but that's how we roll...... http://www.sofritony.com/ Ilitests-- if I can't wear my Timberlands, they ain't gettin' my money! DocTee May 02 2008 09:52 PM Met Irish] It's worth a visit , pricey but that's how we roll...... http://www.sofritony.com/ Ilitests-- if I can't wear my Timberlands, they ain't gettin' my money! SteveJRogers May 02 2008 10:35 PM ="AG/DC"]Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view. Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over. Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership. I'm sure baseball (the only sport where players are allowed to come and go from the "sidelines" as they please) history is FILLED with such examples of Hernandez's not wanting to see an excruciating end to one hell of a season. The Mets win Game 6 of 1999 NLCS on the other hand, the card game would never be brought up at all. AG/DC May 02 2008 10:43 PM ="SteveJRogers"]="AG/DC"]Hernandez has the advantage of making his argument after the fact, from a happy point of view. Hernandez and Mitchell were still in a game. For Bonilla and Henderson the game was over. Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership. I don't know why you would say that. ="SteveJRogers"][i'm sure baseball (the only sport where players are allowed to come and go from the "sidelines" as they please) history is FILLED with such examples of Hernandez's not wanting to see an excruciating end to one hell of a season. The Mets win Game 6 of 1999 NLCS on the other hand, the card game would never be brought up at all. These two paragraphs are not on opposite hands at all. I'm sure baseball is filled with examples of guys who are out of a game allegedly playing cards in the alleged clubhouse. SteveJRogers May 02 2008 11:18 PM ="AG/DC"]SteveJRogers wrote: ="AG/DC"]Hernandez has Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership. I don't know why you would say that. Because it becomes a non story. And even so the media and fans would have given Hernandez a pass for it because "they would have done the same thing." In fact it probably would have enhanced Hernandez's "winner" mystique based on the fact that he didn't want to face seeing the Red Sox celebrate on his home field after such a great season. Just about anything. Actually, the only reason why it IS a story is because it's one of those quaint "people do silly superstitious things like never moving from their position" sort of stories. AG/DC May 02 2008 11:47 PM If it would be a non-story, then Henderson and Bonilla are a non-story. SteveJRogers May 02 2008 11:52 PM No, Henderson and Bonilla are NOT a non story because of what they were doing. Again, everyone would have given Hernandez a pass because "he is so much of a winner he hates to even WATCH the final out of his team loosing the World Series live in the dugout" The story with Henderson & Bonilla is that they were doing something completely unrelated, and legend has it they weren't even PAYING ATTENTION to the game. Hernandez at least was watching a TV. G-Fafif May 03 2008 03:51 AM From Tom Verducci's masterful 2003 SI profile, "What Is Rickey Henderson Doing In Newark?": ]Mets manager Bobby Valentine removed Henderson from Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS, replacing him with Melvin Mora. New York lost on a series-ending bases-loaded walk by Kenny Rogers. Henderson reportedly was in the clubhouse playing cards with teammate Bobby Bonilla when the deciding run scored. Asked about the incident, Henderson offers a qualified denial: "Kenny Rogers came in the clubhouse, and we was playing cards? If Kenny Rogers made it off that mound and we was playing cards, everybody in America, even the press, would have been there when we were playing. So you can't say that. "Was it an excuse? These two guys [Henderson and Bonilla], you had took us out. We tied the game up, and you took me and him right back out of the game. What for? For defensive purposes that you said? Moore [sic]? That's your judgment, and you're my chief and you're the manager. And I have no say-so. Does it frustrate me? Yes, because during the postseason I feel that's when the people that's gonna rise to the top should rise to the top, and I feel I was always one of them type of players." What he said. AG/DC May 03 2008 07:06 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 03 2008 07:33 AM Steve, a player who is still available dropping his pants and underpants and making plane reservations is more counterproductive to his team than a player who is out of a game doing anything. Allegedly doing anything. And anybody who can't stand to see his team lose ought to say so with his bat. Frayed Knot May 03 2008 07:19 AM ]the media and fans would have given Hernandez a pass for it because "they would have done the same thing." In fact it probably would have enhanced Hernandez's "winner" mystique based on the fact that he didn't want to face seeing the Red Sox celebrate on his home field after such a great season. Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying Now replace the Game 6 comeback with a Carter pop-out and does the Keith story retain the same warm fuzzy feeling? a) No way I'm going to pretend so AG/DC May 03 2008 07:35 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 03 2008 10:00 AM Replace "winner" with "whiner" in Steve's argument, though, and it works great. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 08:48 AM ="Frayed Knot"] Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying To be perfectly honest, many in the Met fan community would welcome that sort of display from Delgado, especially after this photo after the the last game of the season last year as well as his "About what?" comment about wheither he was disgusted with the current state of affairs with the Mets. DocTee May 03 2008 09:19 AM Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm? SteveJRogers May 03 2008 09:21 AM DocTee wrote: Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm? Yes, IIRC it was for a charity auction thing. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 09:50 AM Just for the record, I'm just arguing that I can see people's (media, fans) point in giving Hernandez a pass in the "Well thats what I would have done" vein. Same reasoning for Met fans to be disgusted with Glavine's reaction to his final Met performance (granted that was probably more Glavine/Braves haters having at it with him and if it was John Maine it would have been given the "gee the kid has a good, even keeled head on his shoulder" treatment). AG/DC May 03 2008 10:00 AM I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:03 AM AG/DC wrote: I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard. You and FK like getting the last word on me don't you? So admitting that I really don't care either way, despite listing excuses listed by Hernandez and saying that I see the media and fan's perspective on giving him and Mitchell a pass with the "cute story" approach while giving Henderson & Bonilla hell is another example of me doing a circular argument? metsmarathon May 03 2008 10:20 AM am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:22 AM metsmarathon wrote: am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? AG/DC May 03 2008 10:23 AM Steve, I didn't say anything about a circular argument. I guess it's not the first time when it's unclear when you're speaking for yourself or on behalf of the media. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:26 AM ]While I agree with the general point, there are differences, -Hernandez often makes the point that after making the second out he was so damn disgusted that he just couldn't stand to be in the dugout and watch the season end (though it showed a lack of faith in Gary Carter) as opposed to the infamous card game where legend has it neither man knew of the outcome of the game until their dejected teammates started coming into the clubhouse. OE: Speaking of unfairly treated Mets, I'm LOOPER! AG/DC May 03 2008 10:30 AM And you quote that 'cuz... SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:42 AM mm and you seem convinced that I'm backing down after you and FK argue against the points in my postings. AG/DC May 03 2008 10:51 AM I know not seem, Steve. I wrote that it's unclear when you're speaking on behalf of yourself or the media (or, as Thon mentions, some group of fans). I didn't say anything about backing down any more than I said anything about a circular argument. Are you arguing that you're not backing down (not that I'm saying you are). Because that would kind of not work with your outcry that I'm insisting on getting the last word in. cooby May 03 2008 12:14 PM SteveJRogers wrote: ="metsmarathon"]am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? Steve, you are a nice man and seem to be easily influenced by the opinions of others. But three groups of people that I can immediately think of off the top of my head that you should never ever ever allow to influence you in any way are MOFO posters and ESPN and/or WFAN callers. metsmarathon May 03 2008 07:49 PM SteveJRogers wrote: ="metsmarathon"]am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? yes. always cite your source. duh. especially when that source is you. Triple Dee May 07 2008 07:43 AM G-Fafif wrote: From Tom Verducci's masterful 2003 SI profile, "What Is Rickey Henderson Doing In Newark?": ]Mets manager Bobby Valentine removed Henderson from Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS, replacing him with Melvin Mora. New York lost on a series-ending bases-loaded walk by Kenny Rogers. Henderson reportedly was in the clubhouse playing cards with teammate Bobby Bonilla when the deciding run scored. Asked about the incident, Henderson offers a qualified denial: "Kenny Rogers came in the clubhouse, and we was playing cards? If Kenny Rogers made it off that mound and we was playing cards, everybody in America, even the press, would have been there when we were playing. So you can't say that. "Was it an excuse? These two guys [Henderson and Bonilla], you had took us out. We tied the game up, and you took me and him right back out of the game. What for? For defensive purposes that you said? Moore [sic]? That's your judgment, and you're my chief and you're the manager. And I have no say-so. Does it frustrate me? Yes, because during the postseason I feel that's when the people that's gonna rise to the top should rise to the top, and I feel I was always one of them type of players." What he said. Not to beat a dead horse or anything, but I don't believe it was the act of playing cards that infuriated everybody, but rather what Henderson said in his post game comments: "I was heartbroken. I had 2 pairs but Bobby had 3 jacks" That quote would make an awesome sig btw.

KTE's Uniform History! Everything, right down to stuff that was only used for promotional purposes!

="Batty31"]It sounds like the food choices haven't changed much since I was last at Shea, which was like 4, 5 years ago. I usually bring my own food since the only thing I find edible are the pretzels. Do they at least still have Carvel's? Yup, they sure do.

Well, according to the Shea/Citi Side-By-Side comparison, the new place should have more restaurant space Restaurants (capacity) Citi Field Ebbets Club Lounge (734) Sterling Club Lounge (1,600) Left Field Club Restaurant (500) Promenade Grill (300) Shea Diamond Club (309) The Grill Room (219)

="KC"]G-F: >>>otherwise you'll find yourself trying to convince overofficious ushers that you, an adult, aren't trying to pull a fast one, just trying to buy something you like. It's often a losing argument<<< Crusty-ol'-pain-in-the-ass ushers could be a whole thread by itself. I have a couple of war stories. I've tried "I'd like to talk to people in the Aramak office" (which, actually WAS the reason for me to gain access to the field level, I've met a few of them and like to say hello whenever I get a chance) quite a number of times to no avail.

G-Fafif wrote: Knishes seem to come and go. Grilled chicken sandwiches aren't too bad and accessible. I miss the all-level Havana Cubanos. But yes, there is a bizarre caste system to the concessions, a vestige, perhaps, of the early 20th century when "box seats" must have carried far more cachet than they do now. I was told the Knish stand (located next to Dunkin Donunts in the, and I use the term loosely, Food Court in the Right Field corner) is only open during the week. Interestingly enough so are certain beverages a victim of the cast system. Example, there is a Sam Adams tap stand that is in only one location on the mezz, one beverage stand will only have the mass produced domestic products (Miller, Coors, Budweiser, Bud Light and Bud Select) but walk a few sections over and you can find Brooklyn Lager, Heineken, Becks and Amstel, and there is a Corona stand on the Field level (sadly no limes). One would think ALL beverage carts should be stocked no? Or at least instead of random stands, have one well placed stand only for the assorted non-mass produced stuff on each level. The demise of Casey's 37, and that lounge on the field level (now a Nike kiosk) for no real apparent reason (it was on the mezz right on top of what is now the Team Store behind home) has also created a situation where there is not much of an accessible gathering area where you can have a beer before the game. Oh there is the "super secret" Diamond Club grill room bar, but like the HOF lobby that you go through to get there, you kind of have to know where you are going to get there, and even so it is a bit of an "out of the way" meetup spot.

Anyone know what that carnival sort of thing is/was that is setup in Shea's parking lot the day that photo was taken? Also, if you think Google Maps' now 2 years out of date photo of the Shea area is bad, check out Petco Park, it still hasn't been completed yet!

Heh, I like to know who the 3.1 percent were that thought the amenities walking distance from Shea were excellent? The owners of that deli alongside 126? The owners of the marina establishment? Or did they go on a nice 5-10 minute walk to College Point Blvd? Or the other way into the Corona area? Oh sure it kind of is walking distance, but it's not Wrigleyville or anything. Better off taking your chances driving.

I'd like to know how the Yankees and Red Sox ranked ahead of Met fans in terms of "Fan IQ?" I'd wager a good percentage of those who attend games at Fenway and Yankee Stadium in recent years are causal or non-fans that go either; A) to be seen at an "event" or just there because it's one of those "things you need to do before you die" sort of things there on some sort of customer schmooze or C) the boorish young lout that keeps screaming "MY TEAM RULZ, YOUR TEAM SUCKS!" the whole game. I'm not saying there aren't those types of fans at Shea, but how as a whole the Fenway and YS crowds got ranked #s2 and 3 respectively is a bit odd.

KC wrote: Who's buying the stuff? Would they be happier with better fare or do they just not care or worse yet not know the difference? I'm going to go with the latter. My feeling is that most of the comments come from the fact that the Mets don't offer much of a variety or as many "name brand" items for fans liking. Yes Nathans, Hebrew National, Subway (only on the field level, as well as the Mamas of Corona kiosk), Sbarros (I believe new this year), Bubba Burger (also new this year), Primo Italian Sausage and Dunkin Donuts, as well as your regular line up of Pepsi Products are quite well known and are pretty much your basic stadium fare, but I think it's more envy of what is in the new stadiums. Then again, it could just be more Shea/Flushing bashing as well.

So much for the return of the 1969 Jets Date 4/29 Opponent Pirates Number Removed 70 Remover Representatives of Lincoln Mercury FaithAndFearInFlushing.com's Countdown Like It Ought To Be's Remover With Xavier Nady's return to Flushing, Greg and Jason honored Mets who JUST missed out on being on postseason rides: 2006's Nady, 1969's Kevin Collins, 1986's Ed Lynch, and 1999's Brian McRae

="Willets Point":2obz60rj]="Number 6":2obz60rj]="Willets Point":2obz60rj]Fans would start a "Lets Go Mets" chant - without prompting - even with the team several runs behind in the ninth inning.[/quote:2obz60rj] Not to threadjack too badly, but boy, do I ever wish the Mets would run a promotion called "Quiet Day," when they wouldn't pump loud music and force-feed cheers and crowd noise constantly throughout the game. Alternately, it could be called "Learn To Cheer All By Yourself, You Ninny Day."[/quote:2obz60rj] I'm down with that. It could coincide with a resurrected banner day. Btw, is it the chicken or the egg? Can fans not cheer without prompting from the PA system or has all the noise made it so that fans can't start their own cheers even if they want to?[/quote:2obz60rj] In another Met Online Fan Forum though that kind of attitude you are describing gets mocked with the Mets aggressive style of "in-your-face" PA antics. The "Everybody Clap Your Hands" the "Pepsi Party Patrol" t-shirt launch. The idea is that the Mets PA system is trying to create an image of the "real fan" and the fans on that board are replused by the idea that they (the Mets marketing department) know how real fans should act. AG/DC May 28 2008 07:27 AM So, Monday night, changing "Fire Willie!" in the ninth. Is that within the pale? seawolf17 May 28 2008 08:30 AM They only did it because Chris Rock told them to. metirish May 28 2008 12:09 PM Wayne Noble of Syracuse , in Colorado I think. Edgy DC Jan 02 2009 12:47 PM A I hearily endorse this thread as a Craney Nominee. Rockin' Doc Jan 02 2009 04:40 PM I am quickly coming to the conclusion that one of the prerequisites of a craney nomination is that I had little or no part in the thread. I think this is a great idea to nominate threads that contain great discussions and moments. We should get one or two more threads nominated and then start a thread for discussion and a poll for voting for the best thread of 2008.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_616 It seems (from this article, at least) that the 616 term is pretty obscure, at least within the stories themselves. Now I'm less surprised that I never heard of it. Heh, I've just seen it referenced in various Marvel comic forums as part of the "lingo" describing the Marvel Universe's "current" continum. I didn't realize just HOW obscure the reference was though! Ehh guess it's just the way fans refer to stories that happen in the main timeline or something.

Game Called. This particular one is rescheduled for August 11th, who knows about the Jets and tomorrow.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: You're right, they're pretty much pretending the first Hulk movie didn't happen. I've heard that this is also somewhat of a "sequel" to the Bill Bixby/Lou Ferringo TV show in the same vein that Superman Returns follows Richard Donner's Superman II. Though the TV show had little to do with the Marvel 616 universe and the movie is going to have references and appearances galore of Hulk's comic cast. Not to mention the pesky problem that Banner in the show was "David" not "Bruce"

Book time!

DAMN!

What is the record for hitless innings? Obviously Vandermeer has the back-to-back in terms of starters.

2 more outs...

Getting tight here, come on pen, don't blow this one.

Ummm, Howie, last time I checked Choo Choo Coleman is still living...

Delgado with his 2nd Kaboom of the year

KABOOM! 3-0 on Casanova's blast.