Centerfield

42/55 Two of those guys I should have gotten except that they seem to have been completely erased from my memory until I saw their names.

Rumor has it that Anna Benson will be there.

Edgy MD wrote: ... is still hitting. He's gone .323 / .405 / .645 // 1.051 over his last 10, and is at .304 / .462 / .582 // 1.044. Can the world take a firstbaseman whos greatest weapon is the base on balls? Sixth in the league in batting average. First (by 48 points) in OBP. First (by 15 points) in slugging. First by .74 poitns in OPS. He's clearly the best player in the Eastern League this year. And Puello is clearly second. One off the homer lead for a guy that's not really considered a power hitter. Is this AA?

I keep reading this thread title as "Pasties on Hudson". Which, if you are picturing Tim Hudson is kind of gross. So instead you can picture Kate Hudson. Which is kind of grosser.

I ask about Jon Niese. His is the only injury that impacts next year.

Have you seen his salary? You better get working on some more offspring.

Yeah, Ike and the coaching staff have to be able to judge whether or not he can do it. Bunting back to the pitcher is suicide. He has to push it along the third base line so that it's either a hit or a foul ball. Maybe they weren't booing his idea to bunt, but the fact that he sucks at doing it.

If you bunt you obviously cannot get an extra base hit, so the OBP would have to be significantly higher than a regular swing to make it a worthwhile gamble. I didn't see last night's bunt attempt, so I have no idea if he can do it or not. But if he has decent bunting ability, then he should give it a try. I think it will definitely make teams think twice about overshifting. But if he sucks, he should give it up. In theory, I don't have a problem with bunting to try to get hits. I have a problem with bunts designed to make outs.

I'd like that rule only to apply to the Yankees. And I'd like the forfeited salary to be donated to me.

Wow. I just had a moment of panic that I might be older than all of the Mets. Thank god for Latroy Hawkins. I can't believe this snuck up on me like this. Suddenly I feel very old.

ARod is obviously being set up here. 5 game suspension. Community service. MFY's forfeit 2009 WS Championship. Sounds about right to me. FREE AROD!!!!

Swan Swan H wrote: A writer on Juan http://mets.lohudblogs.com/2013/07/22/the-promise-of-juan-lagares-and-limits-of-carlos-gomez-comparison/ I'm comparing Lagares to Gomez. I'm gonna compare Lagares to Gomez. Here I am comparing Lagares to Gomez. I'm comparing them again. One more time before I go. And in closing, don�t assume Carlos Gomez as a likely outcome. It isn�t fair to Lagares, and it doesn�t make much sense. Megdal having a career as a writer doesn't make much sense, but there it is. Just wow. If I took "Carlos Gomez", "Juan Lagares", 500 random words and haphazardly threw them onto a screen, it would end up making more sense than that article.

I voted Young, but more by default. Byrd is the better player, but trading him this year is the definition of selling high. I doubt he produces another season like this one. Let's move him for whatever he can bring back. Let Duda/Young/Lagares/Neiwenheis split time the rest of the way and see what they got. Young is appealing because he can also play second base.

It should be Mejia. No sense in adding anyone to the 40 man for a meaningless start. Hell, activate Gooden. At least it will put fannies in the seats.

Frayed Knot wrote: The weird thing about Murphy is that conventional wisdom from a couple years ago was that if he could ever prove to be able to handle 2nd base defensively he would, at worst, be an above average player for a decent amount of time. The hang-up was that many (including me) assumed that the required defensive skill would never appear. And now it turns out that, while the defense is good enough, it's the offense that isn't. Exactly this. And he's getting worse. What do we do? This situation is even more complicated because Murphy is just one a few question marks that Alderson has to figure out. (Murphy, Davis, Duda, Valdespin)

OPS of .692 is not going to cut it from a guy in the lineup for his bat. And even amongst second basemen, he is 13 of out of 18 that qualify. His defense has been much better than expected, but that level of production isn't enough to warrant keeping him as he becomes more expensive. The guy does have a career OPS of .752, which if he bounced back to form would make him 9 out of 18. He has been as good as .810 (2011, albeit shortened season) and that would put him at 6th, and in All-Star contention. He looked great when he came up (OPS of .870 in his first 130 AB) but hasn't come close to matching that level of production since. Interesting call for Sandy to make as he moves forward. I would love to see what Flores can do in the bigs, and if he is as clunky in the field as advertised.

Mets � Willets Point wrote: Robinson Cano is not impressed. This is great. I hope that now Nunez will hesitate just a split second next time he wants to call off Cano allowing the ball to drop between them.

41. It feels like a good number.

Typical Vic. Always talking about his FEELINGS.

bmfc1 wrote: Jeter back to the DL. The DL becomes that much better with Jeter on it. BoC.

I love the CPF.

I think I'm being unclear on my point(s). They are as follows: 1. Beltran is and was a terrific player. He is one of the greatest of all time, a borderline Hall of Famer, and he was great when he was here with the Mets. I'm disappointed he isn't appreciated more than he is. I get that some saw him as disinterested. I didn't see that at all. If anything, I saw a guy who was perhaps too sensitive to criticism. But it definitely seemed to me that he cared. 2. I am a fan of Beltran. Therefore, I hope he gets elected to the Hall of Fame. I hope when he gets elected his plaque bears the logo of the Mets, a team of which I am also a fan. Because of that, the topic of this thread matters to me. To some, the team that his plaque bears is criteria used to determine whether or not his number is retired by the Mets, an additional honor. So for those guys, the topic of this thread matters even more. 3. I agree that the plaque shouldn't be a brightline rule as to whether a number should be retired or not. I'm not sure I have a concrete rule for this. By it's nature, it's a matter of opinion. I don't know that I would retire Beltran's number. Even if his HOF plaque had a Mets logo. As much as I love Beltran, I am leaning toward no. However, I do think that Piazza's should be retired. And to illustrate that I don't think the HOF thing should go hand-in-hand with the number-retirement, I thought it would have been a great, GREAT move for the Mets to announce that they were retiring his number immediately after he fell short of the vote. I think it would have been a great show of support for a Mets great and a giant fuck you to the BBWA. If the stars were to align, and through some glitch in the system, I ended up as the owner of the Mets, I would first remove the orange dot from the hats, but my second move would be to announce Piazza's number would be retired. Then at the ceremony, I would introduce Piazza as follows: "Hey baseball writers, fuck you. That's right, fuck you. This is what I think of your voting: (I would then pull out a copy of the results, place it in front of me and mimic coitus.) This is the greatest hitting catcher of all time. He defined the Mets for nearly a decade. Brought them to the post-season twice, and a World Series. He also hit the single most important home run in New York history. Without him those teams would not have finished over .500 once. So fuck you baseball writers (mimic coitus again). We know a Hall of Famer when we see one. Congratulations Mike." (Then I would pull up my pants and go sit down).

Edgy MD wrote: You ever meet anybody talking big about sexual success (real or imagined, past or future) who wasn't a douche? What are you trying to imply there pal?

Agreed. And this is not to say that retiring Casey's number was wrong in any way. I just feel like some of us walk around with a haughtiness that we would never retire the likes of Rizzutto, and that the numbers on our wall are all no-brainers.

Edgy MD wrote: Centerfield wrote: Stengel won 175 games (19 fewer than Jerry Manuel) and posted a .302 win percentage. Colorful? Sure. He's a legend and people loved him. But retiring his number? Come on. This is silly. There is no way this would fly today. Of course not. But it wasn't today. It was a choice made at a different time in a very different context. Agreed. And many of the numbers retired by the MFY's and other franchises, that some Met fans mock as frivolous, were made at a different time, and a different context. And those numbers look silly to us, just as someone without the base of knowledge can point to 37 and laugh.