batmagadanleadoff

41Forever wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: I have no idea what the point of this thread is. All I know is that Frayed Knot is on fire and killing it in here. If the Mets can maintain a 90 win pace next year, they're contending. If they can't win half their games, they're not. Who the hell knows what's gonna happen? Going in, everybody thought 2015 was gonna be another pathetic Madoff ravaged season and nobody imagined that this season, the Mets would finish under .500, out of it before Memorial Day. Davey Johnson's Mets were supposed to win five pennants, but most of the time, they couldn't even make the playoffs. Guess I didn't think it was that difficult. Rebuilding teams are generally considered a few years and a few players away. Other teams are built to win now. Do we -- at this moment -- think that our team is trying to win next year, or do we think that are we looking at a couple bad years before we are in the hunt again. That's all. Yes, come next June, we'll have a better idea. I can't imagine anyone that thinks the Mets would be in a rebuild (teardown). The Mets have three pitchers with Cy Young caliber ceilings (Matz, Degrom and Syndergaard). Granted, they're accumulating serious injuries more than they're accumulating Cy Young seasons, but still. There's too much upside potential there. Cespedes hits like an MVP when healthy. And Conforto had his breakout season, establishing himself as a star. He's no fluke either. He was a high draft pick and most experts gave him a more than likely chance to develop into a potent hitter. So there's plenty of pieces here already, before you even get into the future potential of Smith and Rosario. Besides, I don't think ownership has even half the balls it would need to go into a teardown rebuild mode. And it takes big balls to go into a rebuild mode, especially in New York, and especially with this team's mostly sorry recent history. If it had those balls, David Wright would have never been re-signed. Sandy could have flipped Wright for a minor league superstud if the Mets let him.

I have no idea what the point of this thread is. All I know is that Frayed Knot is on fire and killing it in here. If the Mets can maintain a 90 win pace next year, they're contending. If they can't win half their games, they're not. Who the hell knows what's gonna happen? Going in, everybody thought 2015 was gonna be another pathetic Madoff ravaged season and nobody imagined that this season, the Mets would finish under .500, out of it before Memorial Day. Davey Johnson's Mets were supposed to win five pennants, but most of the time, they couldn't even make the playoffs.

Here's the answer. Juan Marichal's Bill James Game Score was 104 -- the highest expansion era game score ever for a losing pitcher: 1. Juan Marichal, San Francisco Giants, August 19, 1969 Game score 104 Marichal is, of course, famous for WINNING these kinds of crazy games. The most famous: In 1963 he threw 16 shutout innings to outduel Warren Spahn. In 1966, he threw 14 shutout innings to outlast Jim Bunning (who could only make it for 10 shutout innings before getting pulled). In 1963, he threw a no-hitter to beat Dick Drott and Houston 1-0, and less than a month after this game in ’69 he threw a one-hit shutout to beat the Reds 1-0. In this one, though, Marichal took the hard loss. He threw 13 shutout innings against the Mets — striking out 13 along the way — but the Mets pitching with Gary Gentry and Tug McGraw matched him. The Mets had a chance to win the game in the 12th when Cleon Jones tried to score on a Marichal error; he crashed into Giants catcher Jack Hiatt, but Hiatt held on to the ball. One more interesting moment before we get to the finish: Willie McCovey in 1969 was one of the most feared hitters in baseball history. He had become so absurdly good that managers kind of went crazy trying to slow him down. They intentionally walked McCovey 45 times that year; it was, best anyone could tell, unprecedented. As far as we know, the record for intentional walks up to that point was Ted Williams 33 in 1957. This was a whole different thing. In addition, the Mets had a special way of attacking McCovey, something they called “The Hodges Shift,” after manager Gil Hodges. He put three infielders on the right side of the infield, which is now common. But the third baseman, instead of moving over to where the shortstop usually stands, was instead used as a fourth outfielder. He played deep left-center. The Mets put the Hodges shift on in the 13th, and McCovey blasted a long fly ball to left-center — directly behind where Mets third baseman Bobby Pfiel was standing. “You take it!” Pfiel shouted out immediately (“I know I can catch a fly ball, but not like that,” Pfiel said). Mets centerfielder Cleon Jones, who was playing more toward right raced over and made a leaping, insane catch at the wall. “I’ll think of something,” Tommie Agee told Jones and teammates in the dugout before he went to the plate into the 14th inning. He was 0-for-5 with three strikeouts up to that point. But he did think of something — he hit the walk-off homer that finally ended the game and, this time, broke Marichal’s heart. http://joeposnanski.com/hard-luck-losers/

I wonder if we'll ever again see a starting pitcher throw 13.1 innings. What's just as anachronistic is the first relief pitcher in the game entering a tied game in extra innings and pitching four innings. Longest outing by a losing pitcher? (probably not) Not the answer. I don't feel like looking it up, but I think there was a marathon extra inning game where at least one and probably both pitchers went the distance. This was even before the Babe Ruth era and may have involved Iron Man Joe McGinnity. To piggyback on this, most strikeouts by a losing pitcher? The record for most strikeouts in a game by a losing pitcher is held by a Hall of Fame pitcher. The record was set in 1969, against the Mets. Tug McGraw relieved Gary Gentry and picked up the Win. But it wasn't that game. It was this game: [fimg=900]http://www.ultimatemets.com/scorecard_graph.php?game=1283&font=1[/fimg]

themetfairy wrote: Was it the longest 1-0 game in MLB history, or the longest that a game was played before a run scored? The Mets played the longest 1-0 game in baseball history. Also the longest shutout game --period-- in baseball history. But it wasn't that game. It was this game: [fimg=940]http://www.ultimatemets.com/scorecard_graph.php?game=978&font=1[/fimg]

Tug McGraw was born on this day in 1944. He was the winning pitcher on August 19, in the Mets magical season of 1969 (scorecard below). What MLB record was set during this game, that still stands today? [fimg=966:2w65jjcm]http://www.ultimatemets.com/scorecard_graph.php?game=1254&font=1[/fimg:2w65jjcm]

I thought the cover photo was fantastic. SI still does great photography. The cover sucks, though, like most every cover nowadays sucks. It's too bad that the present trend is to cram practically the entire table of contents onto every magazine cover.

Centerfield wrote: Can now be traded. And not necessarily the Mets, who have corner outfielders already, but the Yankees, or Dodgers, or someone rebuilding like Philly. Oh. You mean the major market teams that act like major market teams.

Zvon wrote: Could this be our uniform of the future? [tweet]https://twitter.com/metspolice/status/897518396723429376[/tweet] That photo's from a presentation at Hofstra 2012 (Mets 50th anniv.) on the topic of Mets uniform history. That presenter has an historically interesting collection of rare Mets unis, including the one shown. I attended that specific presentation which (and this was my favorite part) at the question/answer section at the end of the presentation, degenerated into a virtually totally unanimous shout-down of the Jackie Robinson rotunda.

bump. [fimg=666:ir7thtps]https://hips.htvapps.com/htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/images/d-day-loc-2-1496749312.jpg[/fimg:ir7thtps]

Frayed Knot wrote: So where would our record be if we got anything close to the pitching we all thought we were going to get? Glad you asked. - if we had received just league average pitching (4.65 RA/G) it would cut the RA number down to 484 where PT says we'd be sitting with about a 53-51 record, 6.0 games out of the WC - with run prevention that would put us at 3rd best in the NL (4.23 RA/G) RA would reduce to 440 giving us a projected record thru 104 games of 57-47, 2.0 games behind ARZ for WC #2 - and with 2016 NYM pitching numbers (3.81 RA/G) we'd be at or about a 62-42 record 2.5 games ahead of Colorado for the 1st WC slot and 1/2 game in back of the Nats The Mets would be doing even better than you think, adjusting for the Mets' runs allowed per game as you did above. Lowering the Mets ra/g would have the effect of also lowering the league average ra/g, which would make for an even lower Mets ra/g if you want to give the Mets a league average ra/g. Also, lowering the ra/g Mets or otherwise, would mean that all the other teams scored less runs, which would translate into slightly lower wins totals cumulatively, for Mets opponents. Because, obviously, runs allowed must equal runs scored just as assets must equal liabilities plus owner's equity. This would put the Mets even closer, if only slightly, to the division and wild card leaders.

I started making baseball cards on my computer a little over two years ago, just before the Mets acquired Addison Reed. One of my first ideas was for a total set. A 2015 season baseball cards set that would have a card for every single player that got into a game, and for every team. So a player that played for, say, four teams in 2015 would have at least four cards - one card for each team he played for. A true complete and total set. This was what I envisioned a baseball card set ought to be when I was a kid collecting cards out of the packs decades ago. And so now, thanks to the power of the modern computer and the internet, which essentially gave my my own publishing house and printing press, I could give life to one of my childhood fantasies. So I invented this set, which I code-named "Neon", and came up with a design template based on the colorful, very easy to read, uncluttered pop artsy sets of the 60s and 70s. I was quickly disabused of my naive but noble quest to make this mammoth set when I soon realized just how time consuming this venture was. But along the way, I did make an Addison Reed D-Backs card. It featured Addison in the classic Addison pose. If you've ever ran a google-image search on Addison Reed, you would've noticed that he's commonly photographed just before he's about to release the pitch. His right arm is typically straight up stiff, pretty much parallel to his body, with his right hand about a foot and a half above the top of his head. It's more of a quarterback about to throw a pass pose, or a whip-master about to crack his whip pose, more than a pitcher's pose, but that's the classic Addison Reed shot because that's how Addison pitches. When the Mets got Reed a little while later, I then made a Mets "Neon" card for Reed to go along with his "Neon" D-Backs card. I made a Neon card for every 2015 Met. Even Akeel Morris and Johnny Monell. When I say "complete" Mets set, I don't fuck around. I also made a "New Judge" card for Reed. This was a limited 2015 set with tobacco card proportions. I say "limited" set because I didn't make a New Judge for every Met. That New Judge card was the only limited set card I made that incuded Reed. Reed doesn't appear in any of my other limited sets. Then I made a Reed card for my 2016 complete Mets set, code named "Sludge" Then I made a Reed card for my 2017 complete Mets set, code named "Hoosier". Oh! I forgot; Reed also appears in my 2017 limited Potato Knish set. On his Potato Knish card, he's pitching at Citi Field in the classic Reed pose (see above), with an ad for the old Swoboda/Kranepool Long Island restaurant "The Dugout" superimposed on the right field wall. The theme of that Potato Knish set is 2017 Mets in imagery that incorporates old and historical Met related themes. So Reed did appear in another of my limited sets besides "New Judge". Then there were some one-offs. I put Reed on a 1969 style Topps card where I tried to be as true and accurate to the original 1969 style of Topps baseball cards in every which way possible, including coloring, tone, saturation, contrast and even texture. And most importantly, I tried real hard to use a picture of Reed that was similar in style, action and posing to the pictures you'd find on actual 1969 Topps baseball cards. This was a most demanding and difficult task, -- the part about using a contemporary Reed photo stylistically similar to the 1969 Topps photos, but I think I was up to the chore. (/rolls eyes) I'll leave it to the forum, though, to decide if I met this challenging challenge. Then I made a comic book style page of Addison Reed with Willis Reed and Robert Reed. This was "The Reed Bunch". The premise there was that Mike Brady would invite Addison and Willis over to the Brady household and Mike Brady would then break in and out out of character into his real life actor role -- shuffling between Robert Reed and Mike Brady, and that this would trigger the hi-jinks that was supposed to follow. I had some drafts but this project turned out to be more in the development stage and with little follow up on my part. Also, the script became unmanageable and totally beyond my control because whenever I had Mike Brady breaking out of character and into his real life Robert Reed role, he'd all of a sudden go rogue, just like the on screen characters in the movie within the movie in The Purple Rose of Cairo. Robert Reed would grandstand it and I couldn't stand it! Specifically, Robert Reed, without my permission or any of my creative input, would, all on his own, develop this huge man crush for Addison. Robert would suddenly get the hots for Addison and chase him all over the fabulous Brady house and up that super-wide and riser-less staircase that every kid of a certain generation envied and wished they had in their own house. And then Carol Brady would suddenly have to make an excuse to shoo all the Brady kids out of the house to avoid them witnessing the scandalous and perhaps homo-erotic behavior that might ensue what with the hard-on energized Robert Reed chasing Addison Reed all over the place, and Addison yelling back while running away from Robert: "Hey! I thought you invited me over for Alice's famous fried chicken! Stop chasing me!" Then Robert would grab his own crotch and respond with a "Fuck you." And Addison would ask "What's that supposed to mean?" Then there'd be a jump cut frame to Alice and Willis sharing a laugh and exchanging all knowing glances in the Brady kitchen over the fried chicken that Addison wanted, while Robert Reed ran into the girls' bedroom to try on Marcia's funky 70s clothes. Mike Brady was a nice family man and easy to work with on this project, but Robert Reed turned out to be a sex fiend. The Reed Bunch then morphed into the Reed Detective Agency, the new premise now being that the three aforementioned Reeds are top flight private investigators. I think I stole this idea, or at least was influenced by the Mike Tyson Mysteries after I binge watched about two hours of MTM because as soon as I was done with MTM, I suddenly came up with the idea for the Reed Detective Agency. In the first episode, Nick Fury shows up and hires the Reeds to find The Redhead, who is missing and was last believed to have gone to Shea Stadium with VicSage to see the Mets. Maybe I'll put that strip in next year's Happy Birthday Vic Sage thread. In that panel, I referred to Robert Reed as Mike Brady, just to play it safe on account of the sex fiend stuff from before. Also, now that he's exclusively Mike Brady, maybe it makes more sense to name this strip The Mike Brady Mysteries instead of the Reed Detective Agency. What do youse suggest? Tune in. So anyways, those are some of my Addison Reed memories. Hope you enjoyed my Addison Reed custom cards.

I don't know if this is a coincidence or not, but if by design, it's a smart move to have Rosario get his first licks in such a welcoming hitting environment as mile high Denver. I remember when one of the Generation K pitchers, Jason Isringhausen was first called up. Izzy would've been scheduled to face the Rockies at Shea, but the super duper knucklehead, Dallas Green, held Izzy back a start on the grounds that the Rockies were the then, according to Green, current incarnation of Murderer's Row, not considering for a second that it was likelier that the Rockies were just an ordinary hitting team whose stats were inflated tremendously by the historical pinball machine offense environment of a pre-humidor Coors Field. Instead, Dallas had Izzy debut on the road against the Cubs, pitching in Wrigley Field, which was probably after Coors, the worst pitching environment in baseball. Things turned out okay though, in spite of the arm shredder. The Mets won, and Izzy pitched a pretty neat game. (two hits allowed over seven innings pitched).

It's official. Amed up. And he'll be in tomorrow's starting lineup, ESPN reports. http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/20212029/new-york-mets-call-shortstop-prospect-amed-rosario-triple-a

I thought he had star potential. And two years ago, it looked like Duda was about to break on through. What do I remember most? How about: what do I remember most fondly? The "Harvey's Better" game, where Duda crushed two HR's and in his first at-bat, flied out to straightaway center, driving the Nats' centerfielder to where the warning track meets the outfield wall.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Too bad Matz can't stay healthy for long stretches. 'Cause throughout Matz's two-year career, when he's healthy, he hurls like a pitcher worthy of Cy Young votes. Since this post, I think Matz's ERA is like a trillion.

The title tells you exactly what the Kenny Lofton-centric article (linked below) is about. There's even a John Olerud sighting in there, and some long overdue recognition (I know how sacrilegious this is gonna be to baseball fans of a certain generation) about how overrated Lou Brock is/was as a HOF'er. Hall-Of-Fame Careers That Cooperstown Never Gave The Time Of Day https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hall-of-fame-careers-that-cooperstown-never-gave-the-time-of-day/

Ceetar wrote: You can trade everyone else if the return yields more value. You can trade everyone [crossout]else[/crossout] if the return yields more value.

[fimg=444:3li1bta2]https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4307/35988851746_0f5b978454_b.jpg[/fimg:3li1bta2] [fimg=444:3li1bta2]https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4317/36030773825_2b2b587efc_b.jpg[/fimg:3li1bta2] [fimg=444:3li1bta2]https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4291/36030773835_ff3b473866_b.jpg[/fimg:3li1bta2] [fimg=444:3li1bta2]https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4300/36030773845_26bf6c51c2_b.jpg[/fimg:3li1bta2] Then there was that game in Pittsburgh when the home team superimposed images on the center field wall to distract Harvey. [fimg=444:3li1bta2]https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4295/35989148986_11979e03bb_b.jpg[/fimg:3li1bta2] [fimg=444:3li1bta2]https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4324/35989148966_7104c4a0b1_b.jpg[/fimg:3li1bta2]

I wasn't at SABR when Bouton spoke, but they posted audio from the panel here. The Times article was very moving. Also recommending Keith Olbermann on baseball cards here. If you're still into baseball cards, the Olbermann link is a must listen. Finally, the explanation for why Rusty Staub was missing from the '72 & '73 Topps sets, beginning at the 43:10 mark. It's got something to do with this 1971 coin: [fimg=333]http://www.tradingcarddb.com/Images/Cards/Baseball/10106/10106-111Fr.jpg[/fimg] Strangely enough, Rusty was always under contract to Topps, even when he "disappeared" for those two years.

metirish wrote: Watched one full round of this, it is tiring after too long I can't remember the last time I watched any of that contest. I have less than zero interest in it, even if there's a Met in it.

Edgy MD wrote: Keith has said that he doesn't even deserve consideration for the Hall of Fame until Steve Garvey gets in.... But it struck me as tragic that a smart guy like Keith let these things affect his assessment of himself. That Garvey had so many undeserving ASG starts (according to 538) doesn't surprise me. Even in his prime, Garvey was at or near the top of my most hated players list. He was, I thought, kinda the Derek Jeter of his day even though Jeter was a newborn when Garvey was on his way to his grossly undeserved '74 MVP. In '74, Garvey was, generously, no better than the third best player on his own team, let alone the best player in the NL, or even a top 10 MVP'er. In his prime, Garvey was an excellent player, an all-star, but he was still grossly overrated, wrongly regarded as a perennial MVP candidate and on pace for the HOF. Keith's comments surprise me. Or not. As good as Garvey was, and he was a star in his prime, he couldn't carry Keith's lunch. I think Keith's a smart guy. I still do. But I've been listening to Keith for a long time now thanks to his Mets booth gig. And many of his stat-based baseball observations leave me dumbfounded. And this happens way more often than I wish it would. Like the idea that Garvey is more deserving of a HOF spot.

Yeah. I don't see a rebuild either. OTOH, "World Series Contender" ain't nothing like it used to be, at least when I was a kid. Nowadays, more than a quarter of the teams make the playoffs and if management could assemble a team that, on paper, could be expected to win 84, 85 games, hey, that's a World Series contender. Because if the projections say 84-85 wins, that team could win 88-90 games with a little luck. So maybe half the teams are World Series contenders.

There was a Met game today?

Too bad Matz can't stay healthy for long stretches. 'Cause throughout Matz's two-year career, when he's healthy, he hurls like a pitcher worthy of Cy Young votes.