batmagadanleadoff

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Yes, and let's not destroy another thread arguing about sketchy interpretations of what's legal, ethical or sportsmanlike. Wan't this one your idea? [fimg=555]http://nicolelorenz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Simpsons-walk-in-walk-out-whistling.gif[/fimg]

I'm gonna barnacle onto Grimm's post. Put me down for a me too on that one. I put down 84-78 and no playoffs in the Predict Mets thread, and about a third into the season, that's still very feasible.

Edgy MD wrote: I've already spoken to that last point. Your amazing response was that you were being forbidden from being critical. I take it back. Apparently, I'm not forbidden. Discouraged, perhaps. I don't know. Please forgive me.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Spring Training, California Angels. Last chances for my fading major league baseball career. Me and a bunch of other hopefuls and fading jocks, desperately clinging for a shot. Me and The Man From Topps. Who am I? I'm Charlie Williams, rockin' a DIY 1977 model Topps card with the Angels team name. To match my Angels uniform that I wore one Spring even though I never played for the Angels. [fimg=444]https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5338/18846385912_032a48eaab_o.jpg[/fimg]

Nymr83 wrote: The Mets need to spend money but need to be chastised for spending money on the 2nd best position player the farm system ever produced. That's right. Nymr83 wrote: Got it. You don't get it. By your logic, the Mets should pay Tom Seaver $25M to pitch for them. After all Seaver's the best player they ever produced. The team's broke. When you have a sub $90M payroll and you're years away from contending, you don't give 20% of the whole bankroll to a guy who's 30 at the beginning of the contract. Why is this so hard to understand? You can disagree. You can go and believe that Alderson was all for this. But you and Yogi don't even get what I'm saying. Granted, the Mets may have a big out, if Wright's disabled to the point where insurance coverage is triggered. But they didn't know that would happen at the signing.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: and was years away from contending Judging by the standings, the number of years until they would contend is a mere two. Wright already had an injury history at the start of the contract. And in actuarial terms, he was already past his prime. Two years is enough for me to put the idea in the "against re-signing Wright column". Did Alderson privately think the Mets would be contending in 2015 when he re-signed Wright? I wonder. Plus, the team's still broke, and Wright's being paid about 20% of the whole payroll. Two years, but three seasons later. It's semantics, but "two years" sounds like in the second year of Wright's contract instead of the third. It's too long to wait to justify the contract. It was the kind of contract the Phillies or the Dodgers or the Bosox could afford. The Mets can't anymore. And I'm guessing that Alderson knew that, but was obligated to act on the owner's impulses.

d'Kong76 wrote: There's a difference between questioned and forbidden. So what's the difference, in practical terms?

Edgy MD wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Like they knew Wright'd be reduced to a disability write-off. I'm not sure what this sarcasm is getting at. You don't know the future. Nobody does. What is wise is to consider possible outcomes, estimate their likelihoods, manage risks, and live maturely with ever results come to pass. This is what was done. The Mets are that guy who goes out and buys a $2,000.00 suit even though he's about to get his lights shut off because he's can't pay the electric bill. I don't see how you can possibly make this analogy honestly while decrying their refusal to buy more suits. This would be a fair, if bitter, way to describe the Minaya regime, not this one. Some ugly-ass suits, at that. I don't criticize the Mets for not spending money. Not really. I criticize the Mets for not even having the money they need to be spending. Which they ought to have.

Edgy MD wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Like they knew Wright'd be reduced to a disability write-off. I'm not sure what this sarcasm is getting at. You don't know the future. Nobody does. What is wise is to consider possible outcomes, estimate their likelihoods, manage risks, and live maturely with whatever results come to pass. This is what was done. So criticizing the Wright re-signing is forbidden?

Centerfield wrote: Yes, but aren't we asking the Mets to act like a big-market team? No. We're asking the Mets to be a big-market team, not act like one. The Mets are that guy who goes out and buys a $2,000.00 suit even though he's about to get his lights shut off because he's can't pay the electric bill.

d'Kong76 wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Like they knew Wright'd be reduced to a disability write-off. No one said they did. So then why are you justifying the signing --in hindsight -- by bringing up the insurance angle?

d'Kong76 wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Doesn't fit the Sherman narrative. Nor uncle-mags. With the insurance, his contract just wasn't as big a gamble as some would like us to believe. We can debate this all day long. People have different opinions. But when you make this into a personal thing, using big words like "narrative", I should just stop responding to your posts.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Doesn't fit the Sherman narrative. Nor uncle-mags. With the insurance, his contract just wasn't as big a gamble as some would like us to believe. Like they knew Wright'd be reduced to a disability write-off. The likely risks were that the team would suck no matter what Wright did, or that Wright's production would decrease markedly. OE -- These are the kinds of risks a big payroll team can afford to take. The Mets aren't that team.

d'Kong76 wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Doesn't fit the Sherman narrative. Nor uncle-mags. With the insurance, his contract just wasn't as big a gamble as some would like us to believe. Like they knew Wright'd be reduced to a disability write-off. The likely risks were that the team would suck no matter what Wright did, or that Wright's production would decrease markedly.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: and was years away from contending Judging by the standings, the number of years until they would contend is a mere two. Wright already had an injury history at the start of the contract. And in actuarial terms, he was already past his prime. Two years is enough for me to put the idea in the "against re-signing Wright column". Did Alderson privately think the Mets would be contending in 2015 when he re-signed Wright? I wonder. Plus, the team's still broke, and Wright's being paid about 20% of the whole payroll.

d'Kong76 wrote: Ceetar wrote: I can't tell if he's arguing that the Mets should or shouldn't spend money. That's how Joel rolls... stuff like signing Wright was dubious but if they didn't pay him he gets to write three pieces on the cheap/dumb/ un-yankee like Mets... he wins either way. It's the most crooked game in the city and the lemmings lop it up. You'd get different opinions everywhere, whether it's the NY tabloids, this forum or anywhere else. The Wright signing was dumb and also, the Mets couldn't, and still can't afford David Wright. They had a sub $90M payroll and they decided to pay a declining player already in his 30's at the start of the contract $18M a year to play on a team that wasn't going to win half its games no matter what Wright did and was years away from contending? I don't even see the issue or the controversy. (Actually, I do see the controversy. But no one said it doesn't take big balls to run a team and do the right thing). With those economic constraints, the Mets couldn't afford the luxury --- and that's exactly what it was, a luxury --- of keeping Wright around mainly because of his popularity and perhaps because fans made fun of the Mets career batting records -- puny for a team that's been around for half a century. Yeah, I know, you're already mocking that last one. But who knows what moronic reasons kicked in, because with eff and Jeff running things, any ridiculous notion is a possible driving force. They shoulda bailed on Wright while they were ahead and let Alderson do his magic trade stuff.

Spring Training, California Angels. Last chances for my fading major league baseball career. Me and a bunch of other hopefuls and fading jocks, desperately clinging for a shot. Me and The Man From Topps. Who am I?

[fimg=944]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/390/18198323444_daf3c840e9_o.jpg[/fimg]

Zvon wrote: Nice TMF. I'll look for the JCL tribe while I review it again. I can barely find any of today's banners on the web. That vine link doesn't seem to work, either.

... it's been a while now since David Wright was an elite player. I'm waiting patiently for the reveal that the owners forced Alderson to re-sign Wright in 2012, against Sandy's better instincts. Those Mets were so rotted out, that they probably wouldn't have won half their games even if Wright won the MVP .... It's coming, little by little. Joel Sherman speculates: Why have the Mets not solved their problems? Here are the main reasons: 1. Money spent poorly: This administration has not been given open purse strings, but it was permitted to spend on four position players � extending David Wright and Juan Lagares, and signing Curtis Granderson and Michael Cuddyer. None of that is working out real well. Ownership probably was the motivating force to retain the popular Wright (for eight years at $138.5 million), but Alderson was hired � in part � to talk his bosses out of dubious decisions. And Alderson was on record that it was a bad idea to give second-generation contracts to players when it came to Jose Reyes, yet it was done for Wright. read it all at http://nypost.com/2015/06/13/mets-offense-flounders-under-sandy/

[fimg=245]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/520/18812330181_df8533b8ae_o.png[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/391/18812330131_7e25ba5c6c_o.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/308/18812330101_700dfd573d_o.png[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/550/18630582958_69eb784631_o.jpg[/fimg][fimg=245]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/275/18630582828_b4f39f89d9_o.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=245]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/540/18812330161_9e9fcc4078_o.png[/fimg] [fimg=433]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/380/18630582978_e0f8cc1231_o.jpg[/fimg][fimg=354]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/316/18197782633_c7b042e899_o.jpg[/fimg]

Bridge games with Tom Seaver. Catch up with Del Unser, who was involved in trades that saw Met fan favorites Tug McGraw and then Wayne Garrett shipped out of town. excerpt: [unser] would develop into a dynamite pinch-hitter who hurt Dan Quisenberry and the Royals in the �80 Fall Classic and also set a pinch-hitting record by homering in three consecutive plate appearances. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/del-unser-traded-mets-tug-mcgraw-article-1.2245948 ____________ Did you know that hours before Steve "Hendu Can Do" Henderson hit his unforgettable walk off HR against the Giants in 1980, he proposed to his fiancee? They're still married, 35 years later. Read all about it. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/steve-henderson-traded-seaver-article-1.2195267

[fimg=555]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8886/18759208011_a338e4d3e6_o.jpg[/fimg]

When Choo Choo Coleman's Baseball Card Beats Babe Ruth's Or Mickey Mantle's �He caught as though he were fighting a swarm of bees,� wrote the New Yorker�s Roger [Angell] of Choo Choo Coleman, the Mets catcher in the early 1960s. When a pitcher who had been a minor league teammate of his was asked who the toughest guy in the league to pitch was he answered �Choo Choo Coleman.� The Mets� manager, Casey Stengel, frequently boasted of his speed and how he put it to good use �running after passed balls.� It hardly mattered that, as [Angell] put it, speed was as �necessary to a catcher as good handwriting.� A fan poll in the New York Post rated him the �fastest Met� and the �cutest Met,� but noted [there�s] only one thing in the game he hasn�t quite learned: How to get on first.� In 462 career at-bats, Coleman hit .197 and had nine homers. Like other �original Mets� on the 1962 club during their first season, he symbolized both the futility and resilience of the worst team ever (42 wins and 120 losses). From outfield collisions to botched rundowns, the �Amazins� invented new ways to lose. Gasped Stengel �the only thing worse than a Mets game is a Mets doubleheader.� Choo Choo Coleman appeared at a New York baseball card show in 2010, his first public appearance in almost 50 years. He signed his rare high #, short-printed 1966 Topps card for me. So what is Rick �Diesel� Edmunds, the owner of Dznutsandcards in West Huntington, West Virginia thinking? At the National Sports Collectors Convention in Cleveland in August, he had 35 1966 Choo Choo Coleman Topps baseball cards in his display case and told me he had another 65 at home. It turns out that he is having the last laugh. And so you can you by following his strategy buying and selling obscure baseball cards instead of the Mickey Mantles and Babe Ruths I have trumpeted. read the rest at http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidseideman/2014/09/16/when-choo-choo-colemans-baseball-card-beats-babe-ruths-or-mickey-mantles/ Disclaimer: By posting this article, I am not assuming that I know more about Choo Choo Coleman or Choo Choo Coleman's baseball cards or anything, really, than everybody else here. Actually, I know nothing. I don't even know what I'm doing here, or how I got here.

d'Kong76 wrote: And you couldn't pay me to listen to a Rush record. No reason to get blasphemous on us now!! That band gets rave critical reviews, especially from trained musicians. But I can't ever get past that singer's voice. What was Lee's voice famously described as by the NYT: "like a munchkin giving a sermon".