Chad ochoseis

Oh, for fuxsake.

Not today, Satan.

Torrens is replacing Rene Rivera as my all time favorite Mets backup catcher. Saved a wild pitch and a run right there

The Melendez legend continues.

I just turned on the TV, so this one's my fault. Sorry, folks.

Is 🍆♥️👵 still on the roster? I thought he'd been DFAed.

To nobody's surprise, I'll take the Guardians. August 4-6.

Did anyone else not like Robert's steal in the top of the 8th? It worked, of course. It led to a big inning. But if he got caught, and he really should have been as Arraez had him dead to rights, we're left with a runner on third and two outs, and you need a hit from a relatively weak hitter in Torrens to tie the game.

Love the camera cut to Chapman sitting next to Ron Washington on the bench, and Wash staring straight ahead. He's not mad, just disappointed.

Piazza-Sabathia

Can bad hitting beat worse fielding? Tune in tonight for the answer!!!

Is it just me, or are other people seeing Gwreck's posts as blank? I'm on an Android. I haven't tried checking from a laptop yet. @Brock Beauchamp

I don't remember who Piazza hit his post-9/11 home run off of, but it could have been Smoltz. In any event, Piazza-Smoltz.

Bob Gibson famously threw at Milner during a spring training game. Not that Gibson needed a reason to throw at people, but I'll guess that Milner hit a home run off him at some point in his career.

How are we doing this? Name a Met and a victim, or name the whole set? I'll start with a Met-victim pairing. Kranepool pairs nicely with Marichal.

Good to know that Sacramento hasn't changed our old friend. https://www.aol.com/articles/jeff-mcneil-drops-loud-f-053337964.html

Not that it's been much of a concern lately but, of course, if the Mets win, the IGT starter is bound to keep the mojo going by starting the next IGT.

Freddy Peralta pitches for the Mets, who will try to make this day different from all other days by putting bat on ball when runners are on base.

That would explain why he speculates that the primary LF in 2026 could be McNeil. My guess is that McNeil won't be much of a contributor this season.

Kind of harsh for Gil. This is where sentimentality comes in a bit. His death was a shocker, and he was as important as Seaver in turning the Mets from a national joke into champions. The players on the 1969 team have been consistent in talking about how much Gil mattered. I can see the argument for insufficient Metliness, but he's not woefully undeserving. Couldn't agree more on 37, though. The early Mets weren't a joke because of Casey, but he didn't help matters at all, and his glory days were with the Yankees. I admit to going back and forth on 24, myself.

Carlos Gomez

I think of retiring numbers as: - an event that should be extremely rare. You can always build a bigger HoF, but it's much more difficult to create new one and two digit numbers. And it's a huge honor to say "player X was so great that we can't imagine anyone even wearing his number ever again" - as much about the player's value to the city and the fan base as to his on-field abilities. Sentimentality has a place here. - Basically, Gwreck's #2. A player doesn't have to have spent his whole career with the Mets, but baseball fans should associate the player with the Mets first. That means 41, of course. And 5 is almost as much of a no-brainer, as one of the best position players of his time, the team captain, and a Met through and through, HoF or not. I'd retire 14. You get at least partial Metly credit for having been a Brooklyn Dodger. And 1969 was a major achievement. That wasn't a great team on paper, and Gil Hodges led them to a championship over the Orioles, who really were a great team. The deck was stacked against those 60s expansion teams, and Hodges was one of the main reasons why the Mets overcame that. And then he died on the job, way too young. It's enough. Mays is a possible exception. Not very Metly, but has a case for being the best player who ever lived, played most of his career for one of the Mets' NY precursors, did actually play for the Mets, and was promised not to have the number reassigned during his very long lifetime. It would be unseemly at this point to shrug shoulders, say "he's dead, so it's OK", and hand 24 to the next prospect who gets called up from Syracuse. 31, I guess. Has quite a bit of Los Angeles Dodger in him, but one of the game's greats, and is part of some important Met moments. Keef gets some points for the added goodwill generated from decades in the booth, but he was a Cardinal as much as a Met. The others? Mainly good, but not good enough. Strawberry particularly annoys me. This was someone who readily admitted to not giving his best efforts as a Met. Rehabilitate his image? Sure. Retire his number? Not so fast. Beltran? Great, but not Metly enough. Played for five other teams that I can think of. Would fans of other teams think of him as a Met first, or as a Royal? And it's time to take 8 out of mothballs.

Hey, just testing. So far, so good, though it will take some getting used to. One question - do we still have a non-baseball forum for those of us who enjoy some of the good conversations about those few things in the world that aren't directly related to the Mets? Thanks.