batmagadanleadoff

=nymr83 post_id=65628 time=1622069432 user_id=54] If you come off the base at all and get tagged, you are out. pretty simple. I don't buy the argument that for 150 years we couldn't have seen you were out so you shouldn't be now. The same argument can be made about the strike-zone. If we are going to allow review, then make the call whatever the review clearly showed. If you don't like the rule, which we are now better able to enforce than we were before, change the rule. Advocate for the rule that a runner is safe if he touches any base before he is tagged and makes no effort to advance to another base, if that is the rule you want. I'm fine with the current rules and fine with the corner-cases of NFL-like review of inches. If you are worried about frivolous challenges wasting time and just letting ALL close calls stand, I'd also be fine with putting the decision of whether or not to review in the hands of any umpire not named Angel Hernandez.

Oh c'mon. An umpire shouldn't be allowed to call a baserunner safe because he was "close enough" in tagging the base. Maybe next, a first baseman wouldn't have to have his foot on the base to complete an out play at first. Or maybe the home ump should be allowed to call a strike on a pitch that he truly believes to be a ball because the pitch was "close enough" to home plate. Because it's so ticky-tacky to call a ball on a pitch that, by an eighth of an inch, barely misses home plate. Youse want a really good football analogy instead of the crossing the end-zone plane stuff? This is like a running back who's about to lose control of the football being allowed to call a timeout just before he fumbles the ball.

Replay is to show dopes like CB Bucknor that the ball was over the fence and not to call Jake out for leaving the bag for .2 of a second due to physics. Once you're on the bag the play is over but now runners hold the tag hoping for a temporary, infinitesimal, gap between body and base. Yes, they were out by the current rules but fix the damn rules. If MLB is testing rules to encourage steals then do away with this nonsense which discourages steals and slows down an already slow game. In the NFL, once you've "broken the plane" of the endzone you can hand the ball to the opponent and it's still a touchdown. In MLB, even if you're safe by "a mile" until the umpire calls time the other team can hold the ball on you hoping that you'll fall off the base like it's Twister. The other half of FAFIF agrees: http://www.faithandfearinflushing.com/2021/05/26/mas-tomas/http://www.faithandfearinflushing.com/2021/05/26/mas-tomas/ I disagree with most of what youse are sayin'. I don't see how banning replay review on those sliding into the base plays like last night's Villar and deGrom plays solves anything. A baserunner can, just the same, be called out for coming off the base live and in real-time instead of by replay review. And then the team at-bat would be screwed out of a replay challenge and might have to live with an incorrect call if the runner never did come off the base in ticky-tacky style. And what about the ball popping out of the second baseman's glove immediately after he appeared to have successfully tagged out the oncoming baserunner? Should a replay review to determine whether the fielder held onto the ball long enough to constitute possession to record the out also be banned? I don't see the analogy between that tag play and the NFL rule that the play is over as soon as a player with possession of the football crosses the end zone plane. Apples and oranges. The baseball play isn't over as soon as the runner touches the base. That's just made up stuff to support your conclusions. So some of your opinions, in part, are based upon something that isn't even true. And what about when there's another runner, a lead runner involved in that play? What if the lead runner reached third on the play but now wants to advance home because the second baseman is off balance or on the ground from the tag play at second? Is that part of the play dead, too? How would that work? Would the lead runner be deemed "live" with the right to try and advance home while the runner on second is now "dead" because he crossed the plane or something? The runner on second, according to you, can't advance to third because you'd end the play as soon as second base is touched but if he comes off the base, he shouldn't be allowed to be tagged out either. And does he have to slide into the base for the play to be called dead? What if he arrives at second standing up? And what if he reaches second on a line drive in the gap? Is that play called dead as soon as the runner hits second base even if the ball is rolling around in the outfield? The idea that replay review shouldn't be used for ticky tacky plays is just a conclusion and it's not persuasive. Every rule in the rule book must be followed, just the same. Umps don't get to decide which rules are enforced and which are ignored, because if they did, enforcement would be an arbitrary farce and the rules and player expectations would change from game to game. A player has to stay on the base just as much as a ball has to clear the outfield wall in fair territory to be deemed a home run. I agree with you when you say that if the base tag rules are flawed, they should be changed ... improved. That makes sense. I don't know if those rules are flawed but if I thought they were flawed, I'd hope for change, too. But I don't see how replay is creating or exacerbating a problem. It seems to me that replay is shining a light on non-compliance with some of the rules. That's what replay ought to be doing.

Frayed Knot wrote: I don't believe that these decisions are being entirely, or maybe even partially, by Rojas. I would guess that Rojas has input. So, for example, a ceiling of maximum innings or innings pitched was probably established collectively by upper management and maybe even Rojas, too. But Rojas would have discretion to lower, though not extend deGrom's ceiling during the game based on his firsthand In-game, real-time observations and discussions with deGrom himself. If this is right, the question then, is whether deGrom hit his max tonight or whether Rojas pulled deGrom before deGrom reached the max.

Here's another rule proposal: whenever the Mets opponent wants to challenge an ump's call with a replay review, the Mets manager has the right to veto or block the opponent's replay review request.

After that, baseball could make up another rule where if a Mets batter doesn't like the way his batted ball traveled, he could ask for a do-over.

Maybe baseball should make up a rule that Mets baserunners are allowed to walk off the base whenever they feel like it, with impunity, and the defense isnt allowed to tag them out while they're off the base. Yeah, it's the rules' fault that Villar and deGrom were tagged out, not Villar or deGrom's fault. /rollseyes

Because the idea that Dom should be playing first base because first base is Dom's best position and Dom's the best defensive first baseman among the current candidates simplifies the issue. The issue is whether the Mets are better off with (Dom at first and (XYZ) in left) -or- are the Mets better off with (Dom in left and (XYZ) at first)? Which pairing produces the best combined defensive efficiency? That's what the Mets should be trying to determine. And maybe they are.

=Gwreck post_id=65263 time=1621726011 user_id=56] You need 6 outs in order to win. It's the middle of the Marlins order. Do you use Diaz in the 9th or save him for the 10th?

Scheduled start: 4:10 PM

=kcmets post_id=64964 time=1621641480 user_id=53] =Marshmallowmilkshake post_id=64959 time=1621640178 user_id=119] Marlins don't sell programs, scorecards or a yearbook.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: No news on Alonso yet? Mets place slugger Pete Alonso on the injured list with sprained hand. Pete Alonso has been placed on the injured list with a sprained right hand. Tommy Hunter has also been placed on the IL with lower back pain. Mets now have 16 players on the IL. Developing story, check back for details https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-pete-alonso-injured-list-20210521-yyhwl7l7z5bdfkey6rcewddrji-story.htmlhttps://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-pete-alonso-injured-list-20210521-yyhwl7l7z5bdfkey6rcewddrji-story.html

=Ceetar post_id=64920 time=1621616874 user_id=102] it could be the other way, presumably if he gets suspended for it they get some salary back?

It's looking like Tuesday at Citi against the Rockies for deGrom's MLB return. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/jacob-degrom-expected-to-rejoin-mets-rotation-ahead-of-tuesday-start-vs-rockies/https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/jacob-degrom-expected-to-rejoin-mets-rotation-ahead-of-tuesday-start-vs-rockies/

=Ceetar post_id=64913 time=1621606041 user_id=102] Also it wasn't luck and randomness so much as pine tar.

=Ceetar post_id=64895 time=1621551416 user_id=102] Oh sure, I mean, I wanted steak but it was going to take 20 minutes so I just ate out of the dumpster in the back. It's not like McCann was 1a or even b. He was such a step down that you had to squint to even find a way to justify it as a signing, never mind for four years. And they lost out on Springer too. And Bauer. Money could've gotten those done.

Edgy MD wrote: Hopefully the upside to Nido and other guys stepping up will somewhat counter the failures. The lack of stability won't help. Another excerpt: Nido also provides a strong option behind the plate, with a framing rate that ranks in the 94th percentile among MLB catchers, according to Statcast.

Edgy MD wrote: I've got to give credit that the team demoted Amed Rosario to second string last season... Yeah. Enough was enough already with Rosario. It was like the Emperor's New Clothes with him. Boy was that Met on my shit list. It was like watching the first beyond dreadful coupl'a months of Jose Reyes's career -- but for like four years running.

James McCann losing grip on starting job after signing $40 million deal Excerpt: The one position the Mets clearly had to upgrade from last season is still a work in progress. James McCann has brought a presence at catcher and big arm, but offensively appears lost – even more so than the team's star shortstop – and his pitch framing hasn't been what the Mets might have anticipated. The veteran catcher will take a disappointing .202/.269/.242 slash line with one homer and eight RBIs into Friday game's in Miami. Statcast places him in the 28th percentile among catchers for his pitch framing. It's hardly what team officials had in mind when they bypassed the top free-agent catcher on the market, J.T. Realmuto, and signed McCann to a four-year contract worth $40.6 million. Team president Sandy Alderson at the time indicated the Mets didn't want to risk a protracted negotiation with Realmuto and the possibility of getting shut out in the market if they missed on him. McCann has enjoyed some level of protection early, his struggles obscured by Francisco Lindor's lack of productivity at the plate. The shortstop, who agreed to a 10-year contract extension worth $341 million before the season, owns a .189/.301/.280 slash line as maybe the biggest factor in an underperforming lineup that ranks 29th in the major leagues in scoring at 3.51 runs per game. But McCann's troubles can't be overlooked. https://nypost.com/2021/05/20/mets-james-mccann-not-yet-living-up-to-40-million-contract/https://nypost.com/2021/05/20/mets-james-mccann-not-yet-living-up-to-40-million-contract/

=nymr83 post_id=64714 time=1621403986 user_id=54] =batmagadanleadoff post_id=64636 time=1621382902 user_id=68] Sucks. And sucked. Always. How exciting.

And very view baseball players have this in their pedigree: [FIMG=300]https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71oyBwJliKL._AC_SY606_.jpg[/FIMG]

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: You can't help but be impressed with all the hitters the Pirates developed and acquired in that era, and to hear Parker tell it, several guys you never heard of who were just as good. Somehow the Mets wind up with their dregs (Hebner and Taveras) while they reload with even better guys and fleece the Mets in deals for Foli and Milner Hebner gets this terrible, terrible rep that comes only from Mets fans viewing things parochially, through their Metscentric worldview. Hebner played for the 1979 Mets, maybe the saddest NL team that ever was throughout Hebner's entire MLB career, where he had an off year playing for a team that had hit rock-bottom in a city he didn't want to be in. But before the Mets, with the powerhouse Pirates, and then after the Mets, with the powerhouse Phillies, Hebner was a terrific player who more than pulled his own weight as an everyday player for pennant contending teams.

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=64636 time=1621382902 user_id=68] Sucks. And sucked. Always. How exciting.

Sucks. And sucked. Always. How exciting.

dinosaur jesus wrote: Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Seems like the 70s were a Dodger-Reds decade and less a Pirate decade, to me. Anyway, tremendous talent. Often, when I think of the powerhouse NL 70s teams, I try and imagine what Tom Seaver would have looked like in those We are Family Japanese mix 'n match Pirate uniforms of the late 70s. Seaver's '77 list of the teams he'd accept a trade to were comprised of the four perennial 70s NL contenders -- Pitt., Phila., Cin. and LA. And if Zvon were around, he'd have a pic of Seaver in those Mizunos within an hour of this post posting. He would have looked like a clown. And by 1982 he would have grown a Rick Rhoden mustache, as all the Pirates did in those days. At least we were spared that. I wonder what that says about today's baseball aesthetics when every MLB team wears mismatched tops and bottoms?