batmagadanleadoff

Zvon wrote: Zvon wrote: Spahn? Seaver? Spahn's right! He gave up a game winning HR to Hobie Landrith in '62 -- a well known HR in Met lore. I don't think I was aware of that. Make it more well known. I mean, details please. [fimg=444]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8617/28256744984_4b6db0ed07_o.jpg[/fimg]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I get that the Mets acquired Bruce in large part as a hedge if he goes, but to what extent do you suspect they got Bruce as an incentive to push Cespy out? IOW, "Go ahead and walk, we got a power hitting corner outfielder at half your cost, and by the way, playing hurt for the last month has hurt us as much as helped." Crazy theory? Knowing the Mets it ain't. I am surprised btw Batmags hasn't checked in with such an opinion yet. Not crazy. Plausible. Didja notice that "Jay Bruce" kinda sounds like "Babe Ruth"? I don't know what the Mets are thinking, but a part of me thinks that Jeff W. has quietly usurped Sandy as the main decision maker. It sounds nutty, and if it were true, you'd expect Sandy to push back but still, that's what I'm thinking. If so, expect anything. That's what I got for you if you want conspiracy theories.

Former Mets who wear the purple: Nubuddy If the Rockies didn't send him down, Gonzalez Germen. [fimg=666]http://bsndenver.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/AP_350077590417_4pn3g8z4_gk2a0vj9.jpg[/fimg]

Remember this gatefold cover? [fimg=666:2y7r73i9]http://mlb.mlb.com/assets/images/1/4/0/161218140/cuts/PiazzaGriffey_y0jw6j51_rrpj37o4.jpg[/fimg:2y7r73i9]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I buy into the idea that the Mets already have the offensive pieces to contend, and that it's just a matter of those pieces playing up to their reasonable expectations, which they clearly haven't so far for the most part. This assumes that the starting pitching'll hold up. You know who and who and who I'm talking about.

If the Mets wanted to be bold, they'd move one of their outfielders whose first name doesn't begin with the letter "Y". Some see depth in that outfield. I see a misallocation and inefficient use of resources. I doubt they'll get Lucroy because there are several teams that have more to offer than the Mets. Not surprised that the Brewers turned down d'Arnaud straight up. They can proably do much better. Jeez, Lucroy's an established all star catcher under 30. I get the sense that Sandy won't be bold this year. And maybe it'd be the right thing to do. I buy into the idea that the Mets already have the offensive pieces to contend, and that it's just a matter of those pieces playing up to their reasonable expectations, which they clearly haven't so far for the most part.

Knuckleballers [fimg=555:2t4776do]http://mets.lohudblogs.com/files/2012/09/Pirates-Mets-Baseball_Megd.jpg[/fimg:2t4776do]

Frayed Knot wrote: unless he simply feels that there are fewer and fewer of his contemporaries attending these days (although that list shows a decent number), There's plenty of his contemporaries on that list, including two of his catchers -- Bench and Fisk.

Bill Denehy also threw unseeable heat until he blew his arm out. Jeez, if it weren't for moderner medicine and, especially, the advent of TJ surgery, this current Mets pitching staff would've been mostly forgotten by now, relegated to the sizable scrap heap of flame-throwing pitchers who blew out their arms, never to be heard from again, just like Glass and Denehy and Musgraves and other Mets hurlers from 45-50 years ago.

Dick Selma's fast ball was thought to be the fastest in the Mets system. (That means it was faster than Ryan's, a teammate of Selma's). You can write the same sentence above, only substituting John Glass for Dick Selma without sacrificing any accuracy. Glass, of course, was a career minor leaguer who hurt his arm in the Mets minors in the late '60's and was never the same.

Zvon wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Missed today's game. What was the deal with today's Mets road throwbacks? Any special occasion? [fimg=444]https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/metscubscolon.jpg?quality=90&strip=all[/fimg] Road Wednesday! You mean the Mets have been wearing those road throwbacks every Wednesday on the road this season? I haven't made that connection. How could I miss that?

Missed today's game. What was the deal with today's Mets road throwbacks? Any special occasion? [fimg=444:2jmkeykv]https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/metscubscolon.jpg?quality=90&strip=all[/fimg:2jmkeykv]

That's Reyes's 100th Met triple. [fimg=444:10qri63y]http://blogs.rep-am.com/off_the_record/files/2013/06/mets_piersalljpg620400.png[/fimg:10qri63y]

Frayed Knot wrote: Zvon wrote: Oh, you guys are talking about the outta town sections? I wasn't quite following , I didn't hear what Gary said. Gary & Ron were talking about Wrigley's scoreboard which still lists pitchers by numbers 1 through whatever based on an alphabetical list. And Gary mentioned they used to do that at Yanqui stadium back in the day but never did so at Shea. That shocked me because Gary remembers 10x more about that era Mets than I do yet I was sure that he was wrong. And I found another photo from as late as 1969 where the system was still in use but I can't get it to transfer here. I remember that, and I'm younger than you. Back then, you needed the secret decoder book to figure out who was pitching in the out of town games. Here are two scoreboard pics --- more evidence -- the b&w's from 1965, the color one's from 1973. The Getty ad is the '73 giveaway. That and the scoreboard message referring to the Mets '73 yearbook. Staub's also the right-fielder in the color pic. It's a complete game one-hit shutout for Jon Matlack on July 10, 1973. Astro leadoff hitter and ex-Met hero Tommie Agee goes 0-4 with three K's in his last season. and makes the last out of the game. Agee was the only Astro to come to the plate four times, as Matlack faces just one more than the minimum number of batters. The Mets remain in last place, 12 games behind the first place Cubs, who are 14 games over .500. It'll be another Cubs fade at the Mets expense soon enough. (As you all know.) [fimg=777]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8331/28370954296_871053a303_o.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=977]https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8882/28370954366_9b3cf64db3_o.jpg[/fimg]

Some Cole cards: ]

Lefty Specialist wrote: so what's a manager to do? Cespedes-Granderson-Conforto would be the Mets best hitting outfield. Granderson has, obviously, played little CF. Lagares could be platooned, worked in against lefties in thar rotation, with Grandy and Conforto absorbing most of the bench-time when Lag plays. Platooning your best hitting outfielders is not the most ideal set-up, however, especially when hitting is clearly the Mets achilles heel. In fact, extending that analogy, the Mets are hitting as if both of their achilles heels are damaged. OTOH, Conforto regaining his pre-malaise stroke would go a very long way towards fixing the Mets hitting woes. His slump was a significant contributor to the team's hitting problems. Granderson could be traded, but like Mich asks, how much trade value is there? He's 35 and will be owed $16M next year, the last year of his contract. He has value to a team that sees itself in the race this year and thinks it needs an outfielder, but Granderson, alone, won't bring in a marquee name or some young one with a high ceiling. Conforto could bring that guy in. Despite his Sophomore slump, Conforto's still highly coveted by many teams. It would be somewhat of a shocker if the Mets moved Conforto, and an extremely aggressive move, probably indicating that the Mets think they can still catch the Nats -- extremely aggressive especially since it's not guaranteed that Cespedes will be a Met next season.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: He didn't lead the team in shutouts until 1971. But he had 2 in 1967, 5 in 1968, 5 in 1969, and 2 in 1970. That page doesn't list all shutouts. It lists who led the team in each season. Yeah. I just figgered that out as you were probably explaining to me. Thanks.

Or this one. http://leaptoad.com/mets/gamedetail.php?gameno=823 From the days when the walls were white.

Zvon wrote: Wow. I would have thought he had a few under his belt by then. What about the almost no-no vs. the Cubs in '69? Yeah. What about that game, Grimm? http://leaptoad.com/mets/gamedetail.php?gameno=1265

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I love complete game shutouts. I wish they weren't as rare as they are, but that's probably what makes them special. The Mets have never had a season in which they didn't have at least one CG/ShO, but they only had one in each of the last two years. (Zack Wheeler in 2014 and Bartolo Colon in 2015.) http://leaptoad.com/mets/yrleaders.php?cattype=p#sho Wow! Seaver didn't throw a CG/SHO until 1971, his 5th season. Also, the Mets never had a season in which four different pitchers threw CG/SHO's.

Back, in perhaps, a limited engagement run, in all its Turkish glory. [youtube:2dzubkuw]0dXsaLLuEcM[/youtube:2dzubkuw] What's that theme music beginning at about 22:58? It's so familiar but I can't nail it down.

Daniel Murphy gets the 538.com treatment. Lotsa links and graphs and data. Especially data. What The Hell’s Gotten Into Daniel Murphy? By Neil Paine Filed under MLB excerpt: When theretofore ordinary second baseman Daniel Murphy turned into the reincarnation of Babe Ruth during last year’s playoffs, it was a fun story. Murphy was with the New York Mets through their lean, mediocre post-Madoff years, and he was suddenly the driving force behind their surprise World Series run. It seemed proof that in a handful of baseball games, damn near anything can happen. But for the sabermetrically minded (which presumably included the Mets’ front office), Murphy was still the decent-but-not-great player that his overall record said he was, and at age 30, he was likely on the downside of his career. So during the winter, the Mets moved on from Murphy to Neil Walker at second base — which, according to the stats, was basically the right call. Murphy signed with the Washington Nationals instead, and although projections suggested that he would have a solid season, there didn’t seem to be any way that he would build on his outlier postseason performance. Those projections have turned out to be flat-out wrong. Instead of reverting to his previous form, Murphy has looked an awful lot like the guy who went on that postseason tear: He currently ranks third in the National League in Weighted Runs Created Plus (wRC+)1 and fourth in wins above replacement. (Murphy has also hit Mets pitching especially hard this year, delivering what already ranks as the most RBIs by a player against a team he played for the previous season since 1960.) For a guy who has never ranked higher than 37th in WAR, Murphy has taken a quantum leap forward. If Murphy maintains his current wRC+ for the entire season, it will be the 21st-biggest single-season improvement by a hitter over his previous career wRC+ at age 31 or older2 since 1901: read all of it here: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-the-hells-gotten-into-daniel-murphy/

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: We are allowed to disagree. And thank god for that. Otherwise, what would be the point of posting?

I like Gary Carter. He's in Cooperstown, and, had the Hall gone with his wishes, would have gone in as a Met. Irrelevant, to me anyways. He's one of the best catchers of all time, unquestionably of his era. But See e.g., Warren Spahn, Yogi Berra, Eddie Murray, Rickey Henderson. He was key piece that led to the 1986 championship. At best, he was "a" key piece. But no more key than Bobby Ojeda or four or five other '86ers. He was the fourth or fifth or sixth best player on that team. Was he more key than, say, Clendenon to the '69ers? Or Koosman? The team must feel similarly, as it has not circulated the number. I have no idea what the fuck the Mets are doing, or even thinking with 8. And 24. Note, there is a big difference to me saying "I wouldn't be opposed to" and saying "I'm loudly advocating for.

G-Fafif wrote: There are lessons to be gleaned from the examples of others, but frankly, I don't care what other teams do and I don't care what the Hall of Fame says when it comes to Mets. This is not an endorsement or a rejection of any given number being retired, just a matter of personal principle. I wouldn't not retire a number because the MFYs or the Astros or whoever have a stricter or looser policy. I agree with this totally. I would never want the process of retiring a uniform number to come down to some rigid formulaic algorithmic type of computer-like process. The only rule I would insist upon if I owned the Mets would be that there are no rules. You have to "feel" this out more than anything else, I would think. It mainly has to feel good.