batmagadanleadoff

Hey Edgy! You out there. I have an assignment for you. Or anybody else that wants to play. Vic Tayback! [FIMG=444]https://s3.amazonaws.com/pq-imgs/images/bios/vic-tayback.jpg-14895.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=444]https://www.sitcomsonline.com/photopost/data/703/vt1.jpg[/FIMG] Vic might've guest appeared on more 60s TV shows than just about anybody. Except this old guy. [FIMG=455]https://i.pinimg.com/236x/f1/a1/bd/f1a1bd1e316e4b2e116b539c7ede6326--movie-talk-the-movie.jpg[/FIMG] But Vic definitely kissed more grits than ol' Burt Mustin. So your assignment, if you choose to accept, or anybody else, is to come up with a super-villain character that Vic would've played on the 60s Batman TV show. Burt Mustin, too.

Batman and Robin and the folks here at Typewriter Chewing Gum remind everybody to stay safe and healthy and to social distance and to wash your hands often. And have a happy April Fool's Day, too. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49723684028_a729788bdc_c.jpg>

Chad ochoseis wrote: Mario Cuomo was a centerfielder in the Pirates organization in 1952. According to BBRef, he played for the Brunswick (GA) Pirates of the Class D Florida-Georgia League and hit .244 in 254 ABs. Cuomo was a guest narrator in Ken Burns's 1994 Baseball documentary, where he spoke about his pro baseball past. He was a big fan of the sac bunt, too, if I recall.

And the Mets 1986 batboys, but I couldn't find a good picture of them, though I tried. Backman doesn't count, though I suppose I shoulda specified "players" in the question. Jeez are youse picky. Picky, picky picky.

Fine, 86 I can't find a picture of a major leaguer wearing 86 'cause there ain't one. And every positive whole number lower than 86 was worn. That makes you the winner. Wasn't the original question "the lowest"? That would be the highest. What are you talking about? This, in your own words: What's the lowest number that's never been worn as a uniform number in MLB? So? I'd try and explain where you're confused here but I can't explain it any better than with the very words that you just quoted. Just stare at those rules and concentrate. You highlighted "lowest" when you should've highlighted "never".

Fine, 86 I can't find a picture of a major leaguer wearing 86 'cause there ain't one. And every positive whole number lower than 86 was worn. That makes you the winner. Wasn't the original question "the lowest"? That would be the highest. What are you talking about? This, in your own words: What's the lowest number that's never been worn as a uniform number in MLB? So?

Fine, 86 I can't find a picture of a major leaguer wearing 86 'cause there ain't one. And every positive whole number lower than 86 was worn. That makes you the winner. Wasn't the original question "the lowest"? That would be the highest. What are you talking about?

79? I feel like we just passed all the high numbers now with 'I was born that year, I guess it works' so I'm surprised there are any. [FIMG=666]https://www.chicagotribune.com/resizer/0g6pTDGkFzW08MwIbt2pNFpZfXU=/1200x0/top/www.trbimg.com/img-5b29bf62/turbine/ct-spt-white-sox-jose-abreu-all-star-20180619 [/FIMG]

=LWFS post_id=34381 time=1585593941 user_id=84]Fine, 86

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: 94 Jose Mesa [FIMG=555]https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/jose-mesa-of-the-detroit-tigers-pitches-against-the-baltimore-orioles-picture-id73847753?s=612x612[/FIMG]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'll guess -15. Or maybe -43. I'm not sure. OK. I'll award you a chicken dinner for your cleverness, but I can't declare you the quiz winner. Let's do this again. What's the lowest positive whole number that's never been worn as a uniform number in MLB?

Tough to find a picture of the back of Johnny Lazor's uni, but he wore #82. Great baseball name, too. [FIMG=666]https://blackdiamondhistory.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/johnny-lazor.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=555]https://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/pics/john_lazor_autograph.jpg[/FIMG]

Edgy MD wrote: I'll go with 69, Ted! [FIMG=555]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/C6MvElfmFdk/maxresdefault.jpg[/FIMG]

What's the lowest number that's never been worn as a uniform number in MLB?

Vic Sage wrote: Double Switch wrote: Would you tell me where those numbers come from? i found a website that ranked all of Kurosawa's films as an aggregate of IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, etc. Then i seeded them in each bracket accordingly, with slight tweaks based on my own assessments. Apropos of the big Kurosawa discussion here a few months ago, TCM is running a 24 hour Kurosawa extravaganza beginning this Wednesday at 6AM. Wall to wall Kurosawa.

I remember that Boog Powell cover very well. Take a good look at his feet. He's not wearing baseball cleats with his baseball uniform. He's wearing dress shoes.

I pretty much agree with everything youse said ahead of me. I saw this movie in the theaters last Summer. It was right around the time that I got my idea to make those Batman Mets cards I've been sprinkling the forum with over the past few months. And I was very pleasantly surprised when Neal Hefti's Batman theme played over the closing credits, followed by an LA radio commercial for the Batman Batphone Secret Number contest. The whole experience gave me the idea for a Batman card -- that I haven't posted yet. I think that my favorite part of the movie was all of the memorabilia, paraphenalia, I dunno what to call it -- Easter Eggs? -- appearing throughout the movie. Like the mock Mad Magazine cover of Bounty Law, illustrated by Tom Richmond in the style of Jack Davis. I thought the mock Mad cover was historically inaccurate in that in the fictional universe Tarantino created for OUaTiH, Bounty Law aired in the late 50s through the early 60s and Mad Magazine had not yet began to parody TV shows on its cover. But I nitpick. I loved that Mad cover. And the mock TV Guide. I love old TV Guides. And old those old movie posters, some of them created specifically for the movie. [FIMG=777]https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/KM1J6y6CmAnZHAMJ5tzb0_E42Cs=/1440x0/smart/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/RF6ZS4VZNMI6TDUDJZTIP2MYCQ.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=777]https://i2.wp.com/www.tomrichmond.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Blu-Ray-Booklet.jpeg?fit=1024%2C768&ssl=1[/FIMG] So I bring all of this up more than half a year after OUaTiH premiered in theaters because yesterday, apparently, the movie made its cable TV debut. And so I watched it, more than anything else, to watch the Batman bits over the closing credits, which I was eagerly anticipating throughout the movie. Which brings me to a pet peeve of mine that's been simmering for a few years now in my head but exploded yesterday. It's the recent trend in how cable TV butchers the closing credits. They play commercials and coming attractions over the closing credits, sometimes shrinking the credits to a quarter or even an eighth of the screen. I never liked it because if I'm watching a movie that I found interesting, I almost always stay for the entire run of the closing credits. Right down to the catering companies and the liability insurers and the statement that no animals were harmed in the making of that movie. So I watched in complete disgust as I got about a five second teaser of the Batman theme, only for the sound to totally fade out to make way for a cable tv coming attraction. I don't even understand why the movies allow this? The credits are a part of the movie and often, the credits are creative and artistic. Anyways, end of rant.

If MLB has to play games in the cold November season, I doubt it'll play games in Seattle. Open air stadiums in LA and San !Diego before Seattle.

Chad ochoseis wrote: =41Forever post_id=34215 time=1585335715 user_id=69] I've not been to Safeco, but is that something that seals the stadium and controls climate, or is just a cover for rain? Many years since I've been there, but I remember it as a rain cover. But I don't believe it gets that cold in Seattle in November.

Not me. But at midnight, you can re-live Opening Day 1994 and watch Tuffy Rhodes take Doc deep, and deep and.deep. It's all happening on the MLB network.

Yeah, but those surgeries were already baked in. Even accounting for those surgeries, Mets fans were imagining a dominant several years run anchored by what was supposed to be a dream pitching staff.

[YOUTUBE]TwwPUtz1el8[/YOUTUBE]

Edgy MD wrote: Well, there are six guys in the photo. And three of those five pitchers underwent Tommy John surgery before the photo was taken. It's the nature of the beast. Snapshots last but their subjects don't. Perhaps my excerpting gave a slightly distorted view of Carig's premise. Try this: It's a commentary that's less about the Mets and more about the strain of pitching in the major leagues. There has never been more science within the game. Nevertheless, losing a talented pitcher to injury has passed into the mundane. [***] The photograph's power stemmed from the hope it evoked for the future. In the end, the group's most lasting achievement was already behind it. When Carig refers to "the group", he's referring to the staff collectively, as one unit. And by staff, that would be the youngest five, excluding Colon. And yesterday's NYP back page: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49699804328_0c5fbcfd05_c.jpg>

Today's secret word is "Flrbbbbb!" https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49698136146_ecb5da0aa0_c.jpg>

Carig: For Mets, an old snapshot with 5 special pitchers comes into harsh focus [FIMG=666]https://cdn.theathletic.com/app/uploads/2020/03/24185949/GettyImages-513188354-1024x683.jpg[/FIMG] https://theathletic.com/1690618/2020/03/24/carig-for-mets-an-old-snapshot-with-5-special-pitchers-comes-into-harsh-focus/https://theathletic.com/1690618/2020/03/24/carig-for-mets-an-old-snapshot-with-5-special-pitchers-comes-into-harsh-focus/ Excerpt: It was early in spring training four years ago, photo day at Mets camp, and I wanted to witness the moment myself. A sense of hope had enveloped the franchise. The previous fall, the Mets won their first pennant in 15 years, a triumph built on the back of their suffocating starting pitching. Matt Harvey kept the ball in the ninth in the World Series, and though it ended in agony, it represented the trust that he had earned. Earlier in that playoff run, Jacob deGrom survived an elimination game against the Dodgers with almost nothing. His effort was preserved by Noah Syndergaard, who emerged from the bullpen throwing lightning bolts that appeared to come from another world. Steven Matz returned late in the season and made three starts in the playoffs. Only Zack Wheeler had missed the party, sidelined by Tommy John Surgery in the spring. But once he returned, the Mets would have a full house, the foundation for a sustained run of success. That's why I wanted to be there when the photographers showed up and all five (along with Bartolo Colon) came together on the field in Port St. Lucie, Fla. I wondered how that photograph would be viewed in the following years. “There's a lot of promise and a lot of hope,” Matt Harvey told me, not long after it was taken. “But where we want to be is to make sure that people, 20 years down the road, will look back and say, ‘Damn, that was something special.'” [***] I thought of that picture again on Tuesday, when the Mets announced that Syndergaard would undergo Tommy John surgery. Once the procedure is complete, it will be official: All five pitchers from that photo will have undergone elbow reconstruction.