batmagadanleadoff

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Both players are rumored to be immortalized on Typewriter Chewing Gum special inserts. I dunno. This Alonso feller, alone, is gonna be keeping me busy with the insets and extras all the way up until pitchers and catchers report next Spring.

Frayed Knot wrote: I never quite got the 'Super-Joe Love' thing.... Me neither. He was a fucking scrub. Plus, I had to sit there and watch eff Wilpon stare into the camera and tell me how McEwing was gonna make me forget Rickey Henderson. What? Youse're shocked I wrote this post, right?

=41Forever post_id=23097 time=1569591055 user_id=69] But in Casey's case there was obviously value to the franchise that is not reflected by stats alone. That's the argument for Gary Carter.

Casey Stengel was a manager and a good will ambassador. And I'm not even sure in what order. A player's got to play his way to a retired number.. Apples and oranges. No one here can even articulate WHY Carter should have his number retired other than that this is nothing more than fanboy worship gone haywire. He smiles a lot. Because Casey's number is retired. Because he caught the postseason innings. (°Hello Travis d'Arnaud!) Because be was a great Expo. Can anyone here tell me where Bagel Street is?

Despite his home run, Alonso looked like dogshit against the Marlins this whole series. If these were the first four games of his career, there'd be serious talk about sending him down.

=kcmets post_id=23045 time=1569536899 user_id=53] Not to be the OCD thread police twice in one week but it's the 26th!! #lgm ygb #ymdyf

Jeez,.I don't wanna beat this horse to death but if Carter deserves to have his number retired, than so does Jon Matlack. And Jake DeGrom. The Mets would need to announce right now that as soon as Jake retires, his number's going up on that wall. His Mets career is already at least two or three times better than Carter's. Every time I hear this nonsense about retiring Carter's number, I go off like this. It's like my personal Susquehanna Hat Company.

Nolan Ryan threw only 500 innings as a Met, and we were the worst (and smallest) of his four MLB stops. And he pitched in one game in the '69 Series. Retiring his number would be insane. (Carter caught every inning in the 1986 postseason, and all but five innings in 1988.) The argument for Carter isn't terrible. Not exhaustive enough, and not strong enough, but not as terrible as some here make it. I wasn't advocating for Nolan's number retirement. Just wanted to show how silly "rules" are because lotsa your proposed rules would lead to #30 being retired but not #5. And Carter's case is terrible. I mean, really, what the fuck did this fucking guy do who totally sucked for three out of his five seasons here to deserve to have his number retired? I don't wanna hear about these random good things that Carter did because Steve Henderson also did a whole lot of good things for the Mets. But all of a sudden, people make a list of the good things Gary Carter did and turn that into a case for his number retirement. Because the good things Gary Carte did are so much more different than the good things any other Met did. So WTF did he do that the Mets should retire his number? Caught those postseason innings? Grote did that for two postseasons, too. And one could make a reasonable case that Grote was a greater Met than Carter, unless you take Carter's Expos years and pretend that they were Mets years instead, which is what's really going on here even no though no one wants to admit to it. And even if it turns out that Carter was a greater Met than Grote, that's not the standard -- being better than Grote -- that should get your number retired.

Fifty years ago, last Tuesday, the Mets clinched the NL East. Fifty years ago, the next day, this cartoon ran in the New York Post: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [fimg=666]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48799402932_03eb0c3e99.jpg[/fimg]

=stevejrogers post_id=22883 time=1569431516 user_id=57] =batmagadanleadoff post_id=22860 time=1569424118 user_id=68] =stevejrogers post_id=22854 time=1569422760 user_id=57] I mean, you'd think he was actually on Derek Jeter's level of a sociopath the way you foam at the mouth about Carter. Did he stiff you? Tell you to pound sand because you didn't want to make an on the spot donation to his charity for an autograph?

Or, it could be that Koos is 76 years old and they want to do this not only when he's alive, but when he's of sound mind. I always assume the worst when it comes to the Wilpons too, but here, there may be a less selfish reason. Though I'm sure they're well aware of what you mentioned. I never really thought Koos fit the bill of "retire his number" good, but he was before my time. I defer to you guys. I would vote: Yes: 1. Beltran 2. Wright 3. Carter Maybe: 1. Gooden No to everyone else. Can you explain your case for why Carter deserves to have his number retired but Koosman doesn't? I have no idea what Carter did to deserve to have his number retired that Koosman himself didn't do 25 times over. Carter is third on your list? I'm not sure Carter cracks my first dozen. [Carter] meets the criteria of "Hall of Famer who played a significant part of his career with the Mets". World Champion.... I know that you changed your mind on Carter. And good on you. Smart and open-minded is where it's at. But there's a Met that fits your criteria (if you still stand by it -- "Hall of Famer who played a significant part of his career with the Mets". World Champion.... to a perfect tee. And his name hasn't come up a single time in this whole discussion. Which goes to show how silly rules are, especially here, where the owners can do whatever they want. You paint yourself into a corner with rules and then have to backpedal for the guy who fits the bill even though you think his number shouldn't be retired or the guy like David Wright, who deserves to have his number retired more than any other Met whose number hasn't been retired, but doesn't meet the criteria. Oh, and that Met I was talking about that no one's mentioned is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nolan Ryan.

Pete also broke the Mets all time single season record for extra base hits a coup'la days ago when he hit his 50th HR in Cincy. Hojo (1989) and Beltran (2006) were the former record-holders.

Now 99.8%. I wouldn't worry until it hits 99.9%.

Mets win probability is 99.5%. deGrom on the mound. An Alonso HR. We've been here before.

=stevejrogers post_id=22903 time=1569441320 user_id=57] =kcmets post_id=22892 time=1569434827 user_id=53] I just think it's funny how many people forget how frustrating he was at times. Hell, we share the same name and people always asked why I didn't have a jersey. Yeah, uh no. My Mom loved him, particularly his curly locks. And for Vic: she loved McReynolds too, called him her second favorite Kevin.

Oh, that's just priceless. Now the Mets should retire numbers for players because they smiled a lot. You also said Trump was a nice guy because, what, you had a nice conversation with him about the weather?

You can't know if it's a slippery slope just yet. You'll only know years from now, based on what other numbers are eventually retired and what the rationale would be for those other numbers.

=stevejrogers post_id=22854 time=1569422760 user_id=57] I mean, you'd think he was actually on Derek Jeter's level of a sociopath the way you foam at the mouth about Carter. Did he stiff you? Tell you to pound sand because you didn't want to make an on the spot donation to his charity for an autograph?

Vic Sage wrote: I've always been somewhat elitist about the numbers on the wall. It also gives us a favorable point of comparison with the yankees, IMO, who would retire a ball boy's number and call it yankee tradition. But Kooz? The first Mets game i attended was a game that Kooz pitched (and won). As a fellow lefty, i felt immediate kinship. As i grew older, I knew Seaver was the superior pitcher, but it was Kooz who dominated in the 69 series, not Tom (in 73, too). And it was Kooz, as Tom's wingman, who i always preferred, with his modest, self-effacing manor and impish good humor standing in stark contrast to the brash, arrogant, jock-fratboy persona of Tom terrific. I was more upset when they traded Jerry away than the Seaver trade, though i understood the relative difference in the impact on the team's fortunes. But i was happy for Jerry when he won 20 for the Twins that first season after the trade. And i was happy to see him go out strong, giving the Phillies a solid season when he was in his 40s. So hell, yes, put that 36 on the freakin' wall. He was more of a Met than a merc like Piazza, or a 2-season wonder like Carter. Welcome home, Jerry. It' been a long time. Put your feet up. stay awhile. Yeah. I pretty much agree here. I'm fine with the Mets mailntaing extremely high, or as you say, elitist standards for retiring numbers. If the Mets wanted to limit retired numbers for guys like Seaver and Piazza, I had no problem. But if they're gonna now relax those standards, Koosman jumps to the top or close to the top of that new list. Carter, still, doesn't make my list unless I hafta submit a very long list.

=stevejrogers post_id=22853 time=1569422568 user_id=57] =batmagadanleadoff post_id=22846 time=1569421067 user_id=68] Talk about a slippery slope with if you retire this guy you gotta do that guy. I could never get my head around the retire Carter's number camp, but it's a noisy and sizable camp. Tbe Mets'll retire 8 and I won't like it. Me, I don't think Carter deserves it -- period. -- and it's not even close, not even debatable in my head. If you retire Carter, you gotta retire Clendenon, and he doesn't deserve it either. That's my slippery slope for Carter. Plus, though I loved Carter as a player when he was still good, I really disliked Carter on a personal level. He was a classless phony fraud manipulator but he covered it up because he paid his taxes to the last penny, went to church and always finished his milk and cookies and the world is full of suckers who'll buy into that act.

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=22846 time=1569421067 user_id=68] Talk about a slippery slope with if you retire this guy you gotta do that guy. I could never get my head around the retire Carter's number camp, but it's a noisy and sizable camp. Tbe Mets'll retire 8 and I won't like it. Me, I don't think Carter deserves it -- period. -- and it's not even close, not even debatable in my head. If you retire Carter, you gotta retire Clendenon, and he doesn't deserve it either. That's my slippery slope for Carter. Plus, though I loved Carter as a player when he was still good, I really disliked Carter on a personal level. He was a classless phony fraud manipulator but he covered it up because he paid his taxes to the last penny, went to church and always finished his milk and cookies and the world is full of suckers who'll buy into that act.

Talk about a slippery slope with if you retire this guy you gotta do that guy. I could never get my head around the retire Carter's number camp, but it's a noisy and sizable camp. Tbe Mets'll retire 8 and I won't like it. Me, I don't think Carter deserves it -- period. -- and it's not even close, not even debatable in my head. If you retire Carter, you gotta retire Clendenon, and he doesn't deserve it either. That's my slippery slope for Carter. Plus, though I loved Carter as a player when he was still good, I really disliked Carter on a personal level. He was a classless phony fraud manipulator but he covered it up because he paid his taxes to the last penny, went to church and always finished his milk and cookies and the world is full of suckers who'll buy into that act.

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=22746 time=1569364557 user_id=68] Significant is open to Interpretation. And David Wright fits this criteria because .......?

Significant is open to Interpretation. And David Wright fits this criteria because .......?

Or, it could be that Koos is 76 years old and they want to do this not only when he's alive, but when he's of sound mind. I always assume the worst when it comes to the Wilpons too, but here, there may be a less selfish reason. Though I'm sure they're well aware of what you mentioned. I never really thought Koos fit the bill of "retire his number" good, but he was before my time. I defer to you guys. I would vote: Yes: 1. Beltran 2. Wright 3. Carter Maybe: 1. Gooden No to everyone else. Can you explain your case for why Carter deserves to have his number retired but Koosman doesn't? I have no idea what Carter did to deserve to have his number retired that Koosman himself didn't do 25 times over. Carter is third on your list? I'm not sure Carter cracks my first dozen.