batmagadanleadoff

[fimg=255]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8669/16727756861_74900d1e4c_b.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://www.tradingcarddb.com/Images/Cards/Baseball/81/81-513Fr.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5452/17321682049_8f970b782d_z.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8857/17320398710_a5704c8c5e_m.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8843/16887695193_60f25cc966_z.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8892/17320200858_50f34f3ec0_m.jpg[/fimg][fimg=245]https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/459/19145266886_7a9d42cfb4_o.jpg[/fimg]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy MD wrote: I think he's thinking less about the hitting environs and more about April 12, 1981. I'd be mightily surprised if he can even spell "1981". And I'd lay 1000-1 odds against him ever hearing about Tim Leary, either the pitcher or the drug experimenter. So no, I don't think he's thinking about April 12, 1981. Considering that was about 2 months before my high school graduation, I'm pretty sure I can spell 1981... I know you can. I have reasonable doubts whether Syndergaard can. OK. Now I see what was going on and who "he" was. You're "he". My bad.

dgwphotography wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy MD wrote: I think he's thinking less about the hitting environs and more about April 12, 1981. I'd be mightily surprised if he can even spell "1981". And I'd lay 1000-1 odds against him ever hearing about Tim Leary, either the pitcher or the drug experimenter. So no, I don't think he's thinking about April 12, 1981. Considering that was about 2 months before my high school graduation, I'm pretty sure I can spell 1981... I know you can. I have reasonable doubts whether Syndergaard can.

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Is this the longest stretch that the Mets have been in first place since those start-crossed seasons? Without looking it up, I'd say yes, and that it's not even close.

Edgy MD wrote: I think he's thinking less about the hitting environs and more about April 12, 1981. I'd be mightily surprised if he can even spell "1981". And I'd lay 1000-1 odds against him ever hearing about Tim Leary, either the pitcher or the drug experimenter. So no, I don't think he's thinking about April 12, 1981. Frayed Knot wrote: dgwphotography wrote: Gwreck wrote: Pitching this Tuesday at Wrigley. Gee to DL I can't be the only one who's nervous about a pitching prospect making his MLB debut in Wrigley, can I? Eh ... Wrigley's actually a much better pitching park than it's rep suggests. Jason Isringhausen debuted against the Cubs at Wrigley Field, to much fanfare, what with Izzy comprising one third of the much heralded and anticipated Generation K. Izzy should have logically debuted against the Rockies at Shea, the Mets prior opponent, but Dallas Green specifically held Izzy back one series, confusing the Rockies for Murderer's Row and batshit reasoning that Bichette and Castilla were clearly the present day versions of Ruth and Gehrig. It was too much to expect Dallas to figure it out that the Rockies were pretty fucking tame outside of their historically absurd home stadium that, especially in those pre-humidor days, played like a pinball machine on rocket fuel --- apparently, nobody else in the Mets org back then was there to clear up Green's fuzzy thinking, either. So Izzy debuted at Wrigley, a hitter's park, on a hot Summer day, instead of at home in a pitcher's park against a mediocre road team. Despite making the playoffs that year, the Rockies were 33-39 when they weren't a mile high. Still, it worked out well for the Mets and Izzy. He was excellent in his MLB debut, giving up two hits and two walks in seven innings while striking out six. Wrigley Field was usually a hitter's park. As a kid growing up on baseball, Wrigley had a reputation as the premier hitter's park in the NL. Some of that was, no doubt, hype attributable to the memorable high-scoring double digit slugfests that would play out a coupl'a times a year when the Chicago wind was blowing out powerfully. Still, Wrigley favored the hitter. Wrigley's dimensions haven't changed in my lifetime, so the stadium should play the same. Ballpark Factor ratings for each stadium are not calculated in a vacuum, but rather, relative to every other stadium. So a stadium like Wrigley can have its ratings change, morphing into less of a hitter's park, even without any alterations to its dimensions, if the newly constructed stadiums, overall, are smaller in dimensions than the stadiums they replaced.

It appears that finding photographic evidence of John Stearns in a Phillie uniform is no easy thing. This post is now new and improved, with about 20 or so Dudeless additions. Is that our man Stearns on The Dating Game? [fimg=333]http://www.fluffytails.ca/ritter/dating.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=205]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MCU1ul05R5s/VHfp92-EXQI/AAAAAAAAVyI/fp9mE4cjbXY/s1600/1971%2BPhillies%2BPhotocards%2BPfeil.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5350/17271726419_dbef8bcb86_z.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YDwUVuuwoC8/SrrHXbR7s6I/AAAAAAAACVg/IKzGu8FkGFg/s1600/11+Offerman.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8830/17458132285_37cf8b40be_z.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gHPmiovBllo/UQ_5jWDatdI/AAAAAAAAOZk/ee7yUw-jkPw/s1600/2013+Chachi+Transactions+%2316+Schneider.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iyEsAfVrY0Q/Tu0-m4zyewI/AAAAAAAAHdc/aV_TiVwH-WU/s1600/1988+Topps+%2523PR1+Almon.jpg[/fimg][fimg=236]http://www.tradingcarddb.com/Images/Cards/Baseball/109527/109527-24792452Fr.jpg[/fimg][fimg=245]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YDwUVuuwoC8/TAMGXTXgvFI/AAAAAAAAECA/uIttPujZauQ/s1600/41+White.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XEpxYnbegK0/VGFzBK1FCzI/AAAAAAAAVpU/v7V7sb2VP0s/s1600/1999%2BPhillies%2BTeam%2BIssue%2BPerez.jpg[/fimg][fimg=245]http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7281/16301725873_cd7d79e5b6.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LlPgtUwaIIw/VT7qH20RQoI/AAAAAAAAXPU/vTIVrAkMuxU/s1600/2015%2BChachi%2B%2314%2BFrancoeur.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=245]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8708/17272250939_ab9394ffcd_z.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZnWw4VESJsw/U88nj7c0NoI/AAAAAAAAUiE/0BaibrFhV-k/s1600/2014+Chachi+%2349+Cedeno.jpg[/fimg][fimg=245]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-liLxsszuScs/T_jfC-ysR9I/AAAAAAAAJFE/By1Gd3xKr-g/s1600/2012+Chachi+%2342+Pridie.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/pics/wayne_graham_autograph.jpg[/fimg][fimg=245]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_YDwUVuuwoC8/Se_U7yvZazI/AAAAAAAAAnY/B4uhudak1_Y/s1600/2000+Topps+Newhan.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KM97z8glj3M/Ts2PIyzl4AI/AAAAAAAAHIU/RkpII8IlmdQ/s1600/1986+Topps+%2523PR4+Gorman.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=245]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31hTTIpLLhL.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=230]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CasUoVd3TZU/VTr2smmtdkI/AAAAAAAAXLY/NaVDoLRDz1Q/s1600/2015%2BPhillies%2BTeam%2BIssue%2B%2334%2BHarang.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8632/16698334731_5d2cecfeb0_o.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=345]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iwPyG-WAfqA/T2NZyvnKQ6I/AAAAAAAAH5s/DVxutw9AGtM/s1600/1999+Sports+Illustrated+%2361+Anderson:Welch:Bennett.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=633]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WsS6lqJ1hDs/UIi1g_a3aAI/AAAAAAAAhdY/Zw7JKdmmZV4/s1600/bobby+pfeil+(5).jpg[/fimg][fimg=333]http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/board/attachments/ootp-mods-rosters-photos-quick-starts/168532d1254069846-gambo-t_wil1-photopack-chuck_hiller_phils.jpg[/fimg][fimg=333]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/dd/29/35/dd2935ae16c8f6b133a874b9a602795c.jpg[/fimg][fimg=333]http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/board/attachments/ootp-mods-rosters-photos-quick-starts/166595d1252337672-gambo-t_wil1-photopack-don-hahn-phillies-2.jpg[/fimg]

[fimg=444:2d38gksm]https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7697/17198882587_83cd958ee5_o.jpg[/fimg:2d38gksm]

G-Fafif wrote: G-Fafif wrote: There is also something about how much good-guyness he projects that is vaguely offputting, even if it's far preferable to the jerk store calling to say they ran out of him. Yeah, I don't get this at all. For all the good-guyness, I haven't ever gotten a faint whiff of phony or holier-than-thou or anything like any kind of off-smell. I agree there's nothing necessarily nefarious about him.... Would probably help if he hadn't been an MFY and the Mets hadn't positioned him as Wright's co-star headed into 2014, like "this is what we need -- a Yankee!" This is about how I feel about Granderson. I got nothing against the guy personally, but to me, he's just one more symbol of how far this franchise had fallen. I mean, they marketed this guy like he was Beltran2005 coming to the Mets in his superstar prime. Yearbook and program covers and all that and he's an aging player in obvious decline. NTTAWWT. Everybody gets old, if they're lucky enough. But he's a corner outfielder and ideally, your corner outfielders should be lethal hitters.

[fimg=205]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MCU1ul05R5s/VHfp92-EXQI/AAAAAAAAVyI/fp9mE4cjbXY/s1600/1971%2BPhillies%2BPhotocards%2BPfeil.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5350/17271726419_dbef8bcb86_z.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YDwUVuuwoC8/SrrHXbR7s6I/AAAAAAAACVg/IKzGu8FkGFg/s1600/11+Offerman.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8830/17458132285_37cf8b40be_z.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iyEsAfVrY0Q/Tu0-m4zyewI/AAAAAAAAHdc/aV_TiVwH-WU/s1600/1988+Topps+%2523PR1+Almon.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XEpxYnbegK0/VGFzBK1FCzI/AAAAAAAAVpU/v7V7sb2VP0s/s1600/1999%2BPhillies%2BTeam%2BIssue%2BPerez.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LlPgtUwaIIw/VT7qH20RQoI/AAAAAAAAXPU/vTIVrAkMuxU/s1600/2015%2BChachi%2B%2314%2BFrancoeur.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=245]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8708/17272250939_ab9394ffcd_z.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/pics/wayne_graham_autograph.jpg[/fimg][fimg=255]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KM97z8glj3M/Ts2PIyzl4AI/AAAAAAAAHIU/RkpII8IlmdQ/s1600/1986+Topps+%2523PR4+Gorman.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=255]https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8632/16698334731_5d2cecfeb0_o.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=633]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WsS6lqJ1hDs/UIi1g_a3aAI/AAAAAAAAhdY/Zw7JKdmmZV4/s1600/bobby+pfeil+(5).jpg[/fimg]

So far this year, Colon has walked one batter in 40.1 innings. I would think that this is a pretty rare feat, but I haven't noticed that anyone has noticed this. Could it be that it's not as rare as I'm thinking it is? If the season ended today, Colon would have the record for most IP's in a season while walking exactly one batter. http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/season_finder.cgi?type=p#gotresults&as=result_pitcher&offset=0&sum=0&min_year_season=1901&max_year_season=2015&min_season=1&max_season=-1&min_age=0&max_age=99&is_rookie=&lg_ID=lgAny&lgAL_team=tmAny&lgNL_team=tmAny&lgFL_team=tmAny&lgAA_team=tmAny&lgPL_team=tmAny&lgUA_team=tmAny&lgNA_team=tmAny&isActive=either&isHOF=either&isAllstar=either&throws=any&role=anyrole&games_started=60&games_relieved=80&qualifiersSeason=nomin&minIpValS=162&minDecValS=14&mingamesValS=40&qualifiersCareer=nomin&minIpValC=1000&minDecValC=100&mingamesValC=200&number_matched=1&orderby=IPouts&order_by_asc=1&layout=full&c1criteria=BB&c1gtlt=eq&c1val=1&c2criteria=IPouts&c2gtlt=gt&c2val=16&c3criteria=&c3gtlt=eq&c3val=0&c4criteria=&c4gtlt=eq&c4val=0&c5criteria=&c5gtlt=eq&c5val=1.0&c6criteria=&location=pob&locationMatch=is&pob=&pod=&pcanada=&pusa=&ajax=1&submitter=1 http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/season_finder.cgi?type=p#gotresults&as=result_pitcher&offset=0&sum=0&min_year_season=1901&max_year_season=2015&min_season=1&max_season=-1&min_age=0&max_age=99&is_rookie=&lg_ID=lgAny&lgAL_team=tmAny&lgNL_team=tmAny&lgFL_team=tmAny&lgAA_team=tmAny&lgPL_team=tmAny&lgUA_team=tmAny&lgNA_team=tmAny&isActive=either&isHOF=either&isAllstar=either&throws=any&role=anyrole&games_started=60&games_relieved=80&qualifiersSeason=nomin&minIpValS=162&minDecValS=14&mingamesValS=40&qualifiersCareer=nomin&minIpValC=1000&minDecValC=100&mingamesValC=200&number_matched=1&orderby=IPouts&layout=full&c1criteria=BB&c1gtlt=eq&c1val=1&c2criteria=IPouts&c2gtlt=gt&c2val=11&c3criteria=&c3gtlt=eq&c3val=0&c4criteria=&c4gtlt=eq&c4val=0&c5criteria=&c5gtlt=eq&c5val=1.0&c6criteria=&location=pob&locationMatch=is&pob=&pod=&pcanada=&pusa=&ajax=1&submitter=1

Vic Sage wrote: So if the Mets had Stargell and Aaron and Bench and Morgan and Seaver and Carlton in their primes on the same team, it'd be OK with you if my mother was their starting shortstop, right? i don't know... how good is your mom? Can she throw the ball accurately to first? sign her up! To tell you the truth, I don't know. I never saw her play the position. (I shouldn't be replying. This is gonna turn into bad mother jokes).

Edgy MD wrote: You should probably be a little bit embarrassed and not want to be that asshole's champion. I'm not his champion. I post his articles here because they're relevant, and nobody else here ever, or hardly ever, posts 'em. Megdal's made enough of a name for himself that he at least deserves some attention. I don't agree with everything he writes. On the other hand, to just dismiss him as a troll in half a sentence is a lazy post. (Not that I'm above writing lazy off the cuff posts either).

Ceetar wrote: It's 'sustainable' because you can't unsell a ticket. Of course it's sustainable. That doesn't guarantee anything. He's saying "we'll see". He's theorizing. Now if the Mets go into a bad fold and drop out of the race, and attendance essentially flattens, we might not know whether it was because of the W-L record or because of the payroll. TBD

Edgy MD wrote: You don't know what a troll is? I mean, he is or isn't, but the definition is pretty clear by now. Yeah, I know what a troll is supposed to be. But what happens when someone you think is a troll writes the truth? When someone with, perhaps, an axe to grind, nevertheless writes something that's honest and accurate? And is there a word for something like a reverse troll? You know, like someone who goes to ridiculous, almost pathological delusional lengths just to post something positive on the topic on hand? Just to avoid or deny negative comments or criticism, no matter how deserved? Because if there isn't, there should be. How about llort? Like llama, but llort?

Ashie62 wrote: All this over what Megdal has to say? Really? The guy is a troll. You always make these kind of comments that never really contribute to the discussion. I never know what the hell they're supposed to mean. The truth is a defense, isn't it? You can challenge anything he writes about by addressing the merits, but to dismiss him because, as you say, he's a troll, whatever the fuck that's even supposed to mean? WTF?

Ceetar wrote: A. It's still a 5% increase. It's a small sample and there are various noises in data that small.... He's throwing away Harvey's start like it's a blip in small sample size data because it fit's his narrative, but fails to account for anything else. He's essentially saying it's an outlier. Ceetar wrote: B. He's also suggesting that the Mets are lying about the ticket sale increase. No, not suggested, outright stated it. Ignoring for a moment that the ensuing 4 games have already started to prove the Mets right and him wrong, the answer is right in front of him. If the Mets sold more tickets in advance this season, where does he think fans bought them to? Probably cold April games against the Marlins and Phillies? No, not unless Harvey is pitching his first game at Citi Field. Oh look, he was! Turns out that those tickets sold do indeed count towards percent increases in sales. No he's not. He's doubting that a announcement made in January that ticket sales increased almost 20% is sustainable given the Mets roster and salary commitments. That's all to be determined. Sounds, as it always does, like the piece doesn't fit your narrative.

Generally, teams who win see an increase in ticket sales. Brilliant! But maybe that's better: A close pennant race might sell more tickets than if the Mets ran away with it like they did in 1986. The 1986 Mets, though, set a New York City attendance record at the time. And those 1986 Mets also had three of the top six highest-paid players in baseball. Right, chose both ways just to be safe. He's saying that attendance increases correlate more strongly with payroll increases rather than increases in wins. Granted, he doesn't show any of the research, but still ...... Correction: Megdal links to this piece.

d'Kong76 wrote: Generally, teams who win see an increase in ticket sales. Brilliant! But maybe that's better: A close pennant race might sell more tickets than if the Mets ran away with it like they did in 1986. The 1986 Mets, though, set a New York City attendance record at the time. And those 1986 Mets also had three of the top six highest-paid players in baseball. Right, chose both ways just to be safe. He's saying that attendance increases correlate more strongly with payroll increases rather than increases in wins. Granted, he doesn't show any of the research, but still ......

Ceetar wrote: 62,971 If you sub out the second game of this season when Harvey pitched for the second game of last season it's closer to 51,000. So sure. give or take 3500 fans a game. (you said a week ago so he's probably not talking about the recent homestand. this is the definition of small sample size) Sample size doesn't matter much here because Megdal isn't trying to extrapolate a full season attendance figure. He's comparing last year's attendance after x home games to this year's attendance after x home games.

According to this one-week old Megdal piece, Mets attendance this season is about the same as last year if you take out the outlier home game where Harvey returned/debuted at Citi Field following his arm surgery. How about that Mets attendance? By Howard Megdal 2:27 p.m. | May. 1, 2015 It would be hard to have scripted a more perfect beginning to the season than the one enjoyed by the New York Mets. As usual, the team won on Opening Day�the Mets are 35-11 on the season's first day since 1970�and kept on winning, running out to a 13-3 mark that included a 10-0 homestand and an 11-game winning streak. Matt Harvey looked like Matt Harvey. Bartolo Colon, too, looked like Matt Harvey. The rest of the division lost enough that the Mets opened up a 4.5 game lead on everybody by April 23, and the consensus NL East favorite Washington Nationals began the season 7-13. Accordingly, the team's repeated leaks to Newsday's Steven Marcus and Neil Best, touting a 19.26 percent increase in ticket sales in January, which jumped to 22.6 percent in March, seemed prophetic. If ticket sales had jumped that much before the hot start, imagine where they'd be in the midst of a winning season? But that isn't what's happening, at least not yet. Through Thursday night's game against the Nationals, average attendance this season is 30,430 per game. Last year, through 11 games, it was 28,978 per game. That's an average difference of 1,453 per game, or just five percent over last year's number through eleven games. And nearly the entire difference came from the one-off that was Matt Harvey's first game at Citi Field since 2013 in the second home game of the season. This is unsurprising, and the gap has more to do with the absurdity of the numbers tossed out by the Mets than any failing on their part to sell tickets. Generally, teams who win see an increase in ticket sales. But the significant stronger sales correlation applies to teams that spend money in the offseason. This is even true in the year following either a winning season or a big payroll increase. And by the way, no team, regardless of winning or payroll increases, has seen the kind of purported increases the Mets touted absent the largest driver of such things in many, many years. The reason this matters is that the Mets have repeatedly asserted that they will be raising payroll once attendance improves, putting the impetus on the fans to show up for an inferior product before they invest in it. In the meantime, the team looks good. But the Mets have some clear holes addressable with a payroll more commensurate with the revenue generated in this market, rather than one with Mets owners siphoning off a payroll's worth of that revenue to service their crippling debt load. Thursday night, in the first of a four-game series against the Nationals, the likely division rivals for the top spot, the Mets led 2-0 in the fourth inning. A double-play ball was hit to Wilmer Flores at shortstop. To be clear, this is someone the Mets have repeatedly pointed out publicly they don't believe is likely to field the position adequately, until the money ran out again this winter and they were forced to go with him. Flores muffed the play, and the floodgates opened on the inning. Ultimately, the Mets lost to fall to 15-8, which is good, but 2-5 since the winning streak, which is not. A rough weekend against the Nats, and most of their early statistical cushion will be gone. But maybe that's better: A close pennant race might sell more tickets than if the Mets ran away with it like they did in 1986. The 1986 Mets, though, set a New York City attendance record at the time. And those 1986 Mets also had three of the top six highest-paid players in baseball. It's a fair bet that until these Mets invest in their payroll that much�and there's every reason to believe current ownership cannot do so�the attendance number isn't going to rise much at Citi Field, either. And if you take the Mets at their word about not spending money�the one thing it's been safe to believe about the Mets, post-Bernie Madoff�whatever gains the team has made under Sandy Alderson will continue to be hampered by it. http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2015/05/8567141/capital-sports-biz-report-how-about-mets-attendance

Edgy MD wrote: He's looked very different to me. Significantly less slugging, and significantly more on-basing. Yeah, but his value, or efficiency, is about the same. By the way, those traits you mention are signs of an aging player losing bat speed. And even though Granderson's always had a good eye for the strike zone, he's walking at a significantly higher rate this year, even for him.

Ceetar wrote: Also, small sample size. If he goes 1/3 with a HR and a BB tonight his SLG jumps like 30 points to .239/.369/.359 Meaning he's one good offensive day from going from okay to good and a hot series from great. He's been a Met for almost 200 games, now. And this year, he's, more or less, the same player he was last year.

Edgy MD wrote: Nor do you rip the guys who get you there. You look to replace the sub-average guys, which right now, are at catcher, second, third, and short. Hopefully, some or all of that can be solved internally. I assume you're talking about the 2015 Mets. If you are, and I think you are, their offense kinda blows, too. They're in first place in spite of their bats. The offense is bad enough that as sucky as Granderson is, the Mets have several starters even worse. But that doesn't mean that Grandy's very good.

Edgy MD wrote: I imagine the average team filled with average guys goes to about 81-81. I don't think that sucks. Nor do you rip the guys who get you there. You look to replace the sub-average guys, which right now, are at catcher, second, third, and short. Hopefully, some or all of that can be solved internally. Average guys have held the fort for great teams forever, so the excellent players can put them over the top. No use having Jack Clark if you've got Johnnie Lemaster and Rennie Stennett in the infield. Replace them with average guys instead of pokes who undermine Clark's every effort, and the 1980 Giants are a very good team. The Mets would be fools to release Granderson, no matter what resources they had. Any team would be. I agree. And teams have to have average players because there's more of them then there are stars. But that's a far cry from saying that Granderson is very valuable. Granderson's not an asset at this stage of his career. But these are different questions. We started out with: Does Granderson suck? (a/k/a how good or not good is he?)

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: If you wanna build a pennant contender, average sucks in baseball. The average team, with a roster full of average guys, goes nowhere. Is that really true? I don't know this for sure, but I'd guess that a team loaded with average guys -- that is, NONE below average for their roles* -- would probably be a good team. The teams that go nowhere are the ones who have a guy or three below average. * - by this I mean, your first baseman average vs. other first basemen, your leadoff guy vs. other leadoff guys etc. however it works out. By average, I mean average. Not necessarily below average, but not really above average either.