batmagadanleadoff

Gary Carter---C:5

I think there's a glitch in your scoring method. If Tim Foli, say, is the #5 pitcher, and a contestant guesses Tim Foli as the # 15 pitcher, you credit that as a correct score and award 290 points, even though the guess is really wrong or partially correct, at best. But the points you award gives away the correct answer. Anyone can now figure that Foli is either 5 or 25.

Warren Spahn --- SP:11

I'm in the mood for some fruit of the low hanging variety. Willie Mays--- CF:1

Remember in 2012, when the Mets issued season tickets that featured a different Met for every single game? Those tickets were in celebration of the Mets 50th anniversary season. [fimg=633:25arz46t]https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/-e0AAOSwV0RXrnVq/s-l1600.jpg[/fimg:25arz46t] Anyways, among the 81 Mets featured on those tickets was reliever Turk Wendell. Armando didn't get a ticket. From now on, maybe I'm gonna call him Armando Dangerfield.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Unfair? Wright's one of about 1,000 people that got to play MLB every year, this out of a US population of over 320 million. When his contract is fully paid out, he'll have made over $200M from baseball. And he's not even 36 years old. He'll go down as the greatest position player in Mets history. Unfair? Talk to Bobby Valentine, a can't miss superstar phenom who destroyed his leg early in his career and was essentially a mediocre scrub the rest of the way. If Wright had the same career but was born 25 years earlier, all of his baseball money would be long gone by now and he'd have to work. To make a microscopic fraction of the money he's going to retire with. Talk to Johnny Bench and Mike Schmidt about that, players way better than David Wright. Unfair? David Wright wouldn't trade places with any one of us. It isn't unfair to him, it's unfair to us. He was on his way to a HOF career if injuries didn't start debilitating him after he turned 30. How much we would have loved seeing a Met position player play his whole career here and then go to Cooperstown? WE're still waiting for that. It's still not unfair. That's all built-in. No one has a right or an expectation to make the HOF. The odds are extremely miniscule for everybody and the road is paved with all kinds of pitfalls and obstacles, injuries being the main one and the most common. I could type you a list of derailed HOF'ers but my wrist would start to hurt before I'm even close to finishing it. Hey Vic: I was re-reading this exchange. I'm more in agreement with you than you probably think I am. I just think "unfair" is the wrong word. If anything, I think Wright's closer to being the luckiest man on the face of the earth than anything else. Here's a link to the top 10 moments of Wright's career, according to MLB.com, with accompanying videos. https://www.mlb.com/news/top-10-moments-of-david-wrights-mets-career/c-294906814

First off, eff Wilpon's on the hook going back to the early 90's, when Doubleday relinquished many of his duties out of disgust and eff became the de facto majority owner, essentially running the team. So, having gotten that out of the way --- in this era, a team needs to click on all cylinders to generate sustained success. Usually, it won't be enough for a team to simply draft and develop its own players. The team's gonna hafta plug in its holes by bringing in outside talent, either through savvy trading or through the free agent market. Savvy trading was a hallmark of the Doubleday era, as GM Cashen brought in top tier talent like Keith, Carter, Cone, Ojeda and Mcreynolds to round out the team. Unfortunately, the Wilpon era Mets don't do anything particularly well, at least not over a sustained period of time. They haven't drafted well over 30 years, and pointing out to a Wright or a Reyes or a deGrom isn't much of a defense. They've made few blockbuster or key trades in the past 30 or so years. There's a domino effect here, too, because the Mets haven't drafted well and so haven't had the stock to acquire top tier talent via trades. And to the extent that the Wilpon Mets did have young talent, the team was usually so thin that it either couldn't have afforded to make those trades or it would have been pointless because the Wilpon Mets were usually more than one or two players away. Free agency is the other way to bring in outside talent. The Yankees are the extreme example of success here, as they haven't had a losing record since 1992 and not coincidentally, delve in free agency heavily. The Mets free agency approach is obviously infuriating as they almost always go for Joe Palookas and hope for a Hail Mary, this while playing in the same exact market as the Yankees, which happens to be the largest market in the country. The Wilpon Mets, for the most part, don't do anything right, at least not to the degree to generate sustained success. I'm not even gonna get into how fucking stupid ownership is and how it doesn't make a difference whether Sandy Alderson, one of MLB's most astute execs is the GM here, if Sandy needs Jeff's permission just to tie his own shoelaces. I think the best era under Wilpon was the end of the Shea era, when they had top home grown talent like Wright and Reyes, and brought in tremendous outside free agent talent like Pedro, Delgado and Beltran and even made a blockbuster trade for Johan. And then Madoff happened.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It's still three first-place finishes in thirty years. 1988 hasn't dropped off the other end yet. Two first place finishes in thirty seasons.

Wow!

Vic Sage wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Unfair? Wright's one of about 1,000 people that got to play MLB every year, this out of a US population of over 320 million. When his contract is fully paid out, he'll have made over $200M from baseball. And he's not even 36 years old. He'll go down as the greatest position player in Mets history. Unfair? Talk to Bobby Valentine, a can't miss superstar phenom who destroyed his leg early in his career and was essentially a mediocre scrub the rest of the way. If Wright had the same career but was born 25 years earlier, all of his baseball money would be long gone by now and he'd have to work. To make a microscopic fraction of the money he's going to retire with. Talk to Johnny Bench and Mike Schmidt about that, players way better than David Wright. Unfair? David Wright wouldn't trade places with any one of us. It isn't unfair to him, it's unfair to us. He was on his way to a HOF career if injuries didn't start debilitating him after he turned 30. How much we would have loved seeing a Met position player play his whole career here and then go to Cooperstown? WE're still waiting for that. It's still not unfair. That's all built-in. No one has a right or an expectation to make the HOF. The odds are extremely miniscule for everybody and the road is paved with all kinds of pitfalls and obstacles, injuries being the main one and the most common. I could type you a list of derailed HOF'ers but my wrist would start to hurt before I'm even close to finishing it.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I agree. I'm just about never in favor of retiring a number (and that includes Gary Carter's 8, which should be put back into circulation) but I'm totally on board with David Wright's 5. Me too. And don't get me started on the idea of the Mets retiring Gary Carter's number. It's the absolute dumbest idea out there about the Mets and retiring numbers. And it's persistent, too.

Unfair? Wright's one of about 1,000 people that got to play MLB every year, this out of a US population of over 320 million. When his contract is fully paid out, he'll have made over $200M from baseball. And he's not even 36 years old. He'll go down as the greatest position player in Mets history. Unfair? Talk to Bobby Valentine, a can't miss superstar phenom who destroyed his leg early in his career and was essentially a mediocre scrub the rest of the way. If Wright had the same career but was born 25 years earlier, all of his baseball money would be long gone by now and he'd have to work. To make a microscopic fraction of the money he's going to retire with. Talk to Johnny Bench and Mike Schmidt about that, players way better than David Wright. Unfair? David Wright wouldn't trade places with any one of us.

It's not the outcome Wright was hoping for, but he handled it with the customary grace and class that we've come to expect from him. This guy's been a true class act all the way through. It's the outcome the Wilpons were surely hoping for, though, because if Wright continued to insist on a full blown comeback and played this at arms length-- if Wright was reactivated, the Wilpons, depending on how that played out, could risk losing control of the situation and whatever insurance benefits they'd otherwise receive. They could potentially be on the hook for all of Wright's remaining salary and nobody in their right mind would want to pay $27M for the next two years of Wright's baseball future, especially eff and Jeff.

It's not murky. The more money a team spends, the better it does. That's a proven fact. The correlation might not be perfect, but it's positive. This holds even for teams spending enough to trigger the luxury tax. Teams also generate more revenue the more they spend on payroll. This has been proven in studies by MLB itself and by outsiders. And of course, a team can't spend more without the budget to do so. A team can succeed with a smaller payroll but it's harder to do so, and is a strategy that is more luck reliant

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Centerfield wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: But what's the BABIP for visiting teams at Citi Field? If that's lower than average as well, then it's not a Mets thing, but a Citi Field thing. The Mets roster has turned over a lot in the ten seasons they've been at Citi Field. It's hard to believe that the problem, whatever it is, is about which uniform the hitter is wearing. It's hard to believe that an "intelligent" writer would leave this key piece of information out of the article. That's exactly what I thought when I read that post. That can't be the answer because it's so obvious. So can we look up visitors' BABIP at Citi Field? Stadium splits, anyone? Looks like Verducci failed to look up some of the most obvious clues. Real sloppy.

WINS (fwiw) http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/split/182/league/nl/sort/wins/minip/60 QUALITY STARTS (QS) http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/split/182/league/nl/sort/qualityStarts/type/expanded/minip/60 OPPOSING BATTER OPS (OPS) http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/split/182/league/nl/sort/opponentOPS/type/opponent-batting/order/false/minip/60

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Six shutout innings. Three more innings from Zack like his last six and I'm all ready to anoint him the next Roy Lee Jackson. I need to upgrade this post. Check out the stats. Zack might be the best pitcher in the league, post all star game. Better even than Jake and Max. ERA http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/split/182/league/nl/order/false/minip/60 WHIP http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/split/182/league/nl/sort/WHIP/order/false/minip/60

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Six shutout innings. Three more innings from Zack like his last six and I'm all ready to anoint him the next Roy Lee Jackson. I need to upgrade this post. Check out the stats. Zack might be the best pitcher in the league, post all star game. Better even than Jake and Max.

This is the catch-22 dilemma the Mets are caught in. Anyone with the clout and backbone to stand up to the Wilpons wouldn't get hired in the first place. It's a disqualifying trait and the reason for two first place finishes in 30 years. It's why it didn't make much of a damn difference that the Mets had Sandy Alderson, one of MLB's top office guys if he's gonna be handcuffed financially, second guessed by the owners and micro-managed to within a molecule of his thoughts.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: It's always been very clear to me that Fred is the biggest moron in the organization and it's almost always his interference and incompetence that fucks up the club. Regular Johnny Lunchbuckets out there have trouble distinguishing those characteristics (Fred's entire career is about having "relationships" mainly with Bernie Madoff and valuing "feel" and appearance over substance and results) from the completely different set bad characteristics possessed by Jeff (snotty, insensitive, autocratic, undeserving, and probably, conflicted by having to appease his crazy old man). Hey, kid: I like your style! Bashing eff Wilpon and those hideous Citi Field scoreboards in less than 24 hours. I think you're gonna go places.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: I agree. I have to think that there's somebody out there who can combine those skills. Can't you understand and utilize analytics while also having a command of scouting and player development? Are the two things really that incompatible? Of course they're not incompatible. But maybe stable genius eff Wilpon, who has the final say, thinks that analytics are a hindrance? I read a quote yesterday where Wilpon Sr. is obsessed with the Yankees and what they do. No surprise, there. But the punchline was that Wilpon doesn't understand and has no clue as to what the Yankees are doing.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I agree. I have to think that there's somebody out there who can combine those skills. Can't you understand and utilize analytics while also having a command of scouting and player development? Are the two things really that incompatible? Of course they're not incompatible. But maybe stable genius eff Wilpon, who has the final say, thinks that analytics are a hindrance?

Oooh. Applebee's. How cool. I can't wait. Maybe we'll get a Burger King, too. And then a cellphone store.

Ceetar wrote: I don't know why we're mostly ignoring 2009-2012 (because it refutes Verducci's point a bit probably). More likely because Citi's outfield walls were moved in after 2012. The original dimensions were so drastically different than the current dimensions that 2009-12 was essentially a different stadium.

Centerfield wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: But what's the BABIP for visiting teams at Citi Field? If that's lower than average as well, then it's not a Mets thing, but a Citi Field thing. The Mets roster has turned over a lot in the ten seasons they've been at Citi Field. It's hard to believe that the problem, whatever it is, is about which uniform the hitter is wearing. It's hard to believe that an "intelligent" writer would leave this key piece of information out of the article. That's exactly what I thought when I read that post. That can't be the answer because it's so obvious. So can we look up visitors' BABIP at Citi Field? Stadium splits, anyone?