batmagadanleadoff

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Looks like QBC didn't get permission to use the Mets logos or wordmarks. I don't know if the QBC has official permission or not. I know SNY is basically the official sponsor, and various Mets officials will be there. So I doubt if they slapped a Mets logo on something it would matter. You're probably right. The QBC likely removed the logos from Bud and Teufel's caps because it looks a lot nicer that way. [fimg=333]http://35b.f7b.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Budcrop.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=273]http://35b.f7b.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Teufelcrop.jpg[/fimg] I can't decide what's nicer: these pictures or the Mets scoreboards.

This thing makes no sense on like 120 different levels.

Looks like QBC didn't get permission to use the Mets logos or wordmarks. [fimg=444]http://35b.f7b.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Budcrop.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=444]http://35b.f7b.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Teufelcrop.jpg[/fimg] Just like the Hofstra 50th Anniversary conference didn't either.

Zvon wrote: Centerfield wrote: By the way, the above answer is what I'd do with the team. Me, personally, I'd be wearing a tracksuit and shades cruising around in my batmobile doing laps around CitiField blasting 90's rap. Rollin down the street, smoking indo, sippin on gin and juice (with my mind on my money and my money on my mind). Which Batmobile? I'm sure you know which I'd go after. 1. Rename Citi Seaver Field. 2. Statues for Gil, Casey, Yogi, Seaver, Koosman, Gooden, Strawberry, Piazza(retire his #31) and a few more the fans can pick. I'd want one for Murphy and Kiner. 3. Sure, another level of seating. Affordable tickets (which means moneyball every year-I'd keep Sandy). All fans in the place can move down after the 3rd inning no matter who we're playing (also, no tier tickets). 4. I'll design the new scoreboard myself. It'll be bombastic. 5. No more camo unis. All kinds of throwback unis instead. 6. The yearbook would come with a set of 41 Mets fantazy cards every season. Perforated cardboard pages in the middle. You can leave them in the yearbook or cut em out and put em in plastic or a binder. Make it a traditional thing. Thanks for slowing down that Bowie gif. That was ridiculously fast. Hey, if I bought the Mets, I'd let you design the new scoreboard. With my input, of course. And I don't mind bombastic. Scoreboards should be bombastic, shouldn't they? It's only about the aesthetics. And the info. What would Bill Veeck do?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Youse are gonna hate Megdal even more. I don't hate anyone, and I promoted his interview sight unseen. I watched it. Again, I disagree with the idea that a case ought to be built on against Fred for violating a "promise" interpreted from his remarks. I also disagree that he's running a ponzi scheme inasmuch as the fans didn't buy the Mets this year so as to assure a higher payroll next year -- that might be an expected byrpoduct, but it's not the purpose. They bought the Mets this year because they buy good baseball, and on that count the Mets delivered. That Fred needs to do that as efficiently as he can to service debt should be plainly obvious in spite of anything he says. Yeah, I agree. Now that I've seen Megdal explain his Ponzi scheme analogy, I don't agree with it. Not that the Mets are being operated properly. But that Ponzi scheme analogy kinda blows.

I can't watch this right now but it's pertinent to the thread topic: [youtube]v9Y7LDk-9ws[/youtube] Youse are gonna hate Megdal even more. Here's a picture of his upcoming book, due on the shelves next month:

Centerfield wrote: He's not a politician. He's not running for office. He runs the team and he said what he intended to do. I don't see why it was not reasonable to believe him. Do other owners in baseball do this? They're businessmen, first and foremost. And they're selling a product. And they want you to buy season tickets. And that's what they mainly care about. Your interests and theirs aren't aligned so perfectly.

I'd blow up the whole stadium and start all over. Because that's what baseball really needed -- another soulless inferior Camden Yards knockoff -- 25 years after Camden Yards opened. I guess Camden is the only baseball stadium architectural style out there . Rolls eyes some more. Plus, then I wouldn't hafta explain anything to Mrs. Robinson. Where have you gone, Jackie Robinson (Rotunda)? Far away from Mets Stadium. I'd keep the food vendors. Citi Field does a pretty good job of stadium food. My new stadium would be modern, not retro. Like the new ones in Miami and Minnesota. It'd be groundbreaking and polarizing. And I'd let this forum post pictures that include the Mets logos and wordmarks. I wouldn't enforce my copyrights here. Even though I could.

And "A Head Brat".

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Mac Scarce. We have our winner. [fimg=333]https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hphotos-xaf1/t51.2885-15/e15/11351044_1448548665467799_1018696729_n.jpg[/fimg]

themetfairy wrote: It was not Garrett Olson, who possesses an ERA of 108.00. That's four earned runs for every out recorded. Ouch.

Who is the only pitcher* to pitch for the Mets without ever recording an out? * Position players not considered for this quiz.

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: There have about 1,000 Mets, A third or so have been pitchers. There are September call-ups and cups of coffee in there. I'm guessing 341. From all those baseball card threads I've started over the years that show one-time Mets in the uniforms of their current opponent, I'd say that about half of all Mets are pitchers and that about a third of all baseball players ever are fringe pitchers. Fringe pitchers because major league quality pitching is incredibly hard to find and even then, pitchers blow out their arms at an alarming rate. I'd guess that pitching is about as hazardous as being an NFL running back.

Washington's newest #20:

Nymr83 wrote: Nymr83 wrote: you're right about the control as it looked then, I was thinking of when they all ultimately left Well, the big three (Seaver, Kooz and Matlack) were all eventually traded. It'll probably happen to the majority of the current starting pitchers, too. Harvey probably gets dealt because of who his agent is, i don't fault the Mets for that, i'd deal any player who didn't want to sign before testing the market (a Boras staple). i suspect we keep deGrom and Syndergaard through their next big contract and then Wheeler &/or Matz depending on who get hurt and how they pitch. That's gonna take a lot of money if these pitchers pan out.

Zvon wrote: Zvon wrote: OE: about mid-season during both years I remember thinking, wow, we have a powerful rotation, maybe tops in the NL. Yeah. There were three outstanding starting pitching rotations in '73. The Dodgers had one of them. The WS champ A's had another one of them. And the Mets, who I thought, and still do, had the best rotation in all of baseball that year. Their bats may not have scared their opponents, but those Mets had the pitching equivalent of Bench, Rose and Morgan. And Perez if you want to count Stoney. Ya gotta count Stoney. I was counting Stoney. He was terrific and no doubt a big reason why the Mets staff was the best in '73. But I forgot about Perez and that's a good one. So yeah ... Bench, Rose, Morgan and Perez.

Nymr83 wrote: you're right about the control as it looked then, I was thinking of when they all ultimately left Well, the big three (Seaver, Kooz and Matlack) were all eventually traded. It'll probably happen to the majority of the current starting pitchers, too.

Zvon wrote: OE: about mid-season during both years I remember thinking, wow, we have a powerful rotation, maybe tops in the NL. Yeah. There were three outstanding starting pitching rotations in '73. The Dodgers had one of them. The WS champ A's had another one of them. And the Mets, who I thought, and still do, had the best rotation in all of baseball that year. Their bats may not have scared their opponents, but those Mets had the pitching equivalent of Bench, Rose and Morgan.

Nymr83 wrote: but the 15 club's strength was younger pitching under control for longer though. Under control? In '73, the reserve clause was still in effect, (albeit on its last legs). And there was, naturally, no free agency. Everybody was under control in '73. Forever. Baseball players in '73 had about as much freedom as slaves.

The C is for copyright. ©

Since one of my posts was the inspiration for this thread, I thought I'd chime in and explain some things. It wasn't my intent to draw deep parallels between the '15 and '73 squads. I merely used the '73 team to illustrate that staying pat just because you won last year's pennant is a terrible strategy. I used the '73 Mets as a reference point, not only because they lost in the WS as did last year's Mets, but because the Mets, going from '73 to '74, may have been the most stand pattenest team in franchise history. No new Met debuted in 1974 until Jack Aker in June of '74, about 35% or 40% into the season. Aker was once a terrific reliever but in '74, was at the end of his line, and in fact, would not pitch in the Majors after his Met stint. Two Mets debuted in August, about a month after the all star game -- the undistinguished Jerry Cram and rookie Benny Ayala. By then, the Mets were effectively if not mathematically, done. And then came several rookie call-ups when the roster expanded in September.

Ceetar wrote: Let's not sleep on David Wright now. http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_3B.shtml Provided he's not just done, I figure one more HoF caliber season would put him at heavily favored, but even just being healthy enough to be 'good' for the next 5 years of this contract could get him there. If David Wright makes the Hall of Fame, I'll print this post out and eat it through my nose.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Wagner hangs on, as does Sosa (by a whitened fingernail, at 7.0%). We salute the following departed, in reverse order of votes received: Brad Ausmus, Luis Castillo, Troy Glaus, Mark Grudzielanek, Mike Hampton, Mike Lowell, and Randy Winn (0/0%); Garret Anderson (1/0.2%), Jason Kendall and David F*cking Eckstein (2/0.5%); Mike Sweeney (3/0.7%); NOMAH (8/1.8%); and Jim Edmonds (13/2.5%). And Alan Trammell (180/40.9%)

[fimg=333:3vp3jeln]https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1583/23924937980_1e9e258163_o.jpg[/fimg:3vp3jeln]

d'Kong76 wrote: Why do you think I'm busting your balls? I'm not. I'm not even aware that you have a major part in this. White outing half the butterball picture isn't ball busting? C'mon. No. It's not ball busting. Anybody else writes those new Butterball posts gets three high fives, two lols and a bullet of cool. Me, I'm a petulant asshole. d'Kong76 wrote: C'mon. Please, let's just be friends after all these years.... I can definitely get on board with this one. It'd be a pleasure.