batmagadanleadoff

I'm assuming that, so far, 27 posters voted in this thread. Therefore, a candidate would need 21 votes for HOF admission based on the current voting (75% of 27 votes = 20.25; 20 votes constitutes 74% of the vote). So far, six candidates received enough votes for admission: Randy Johnson (27) Mike Piazza (27) Pedro Martinez (26) Craig Biggio (25) John Smoltz (22) Tim Raines (21) ______________ Jeff Bagwell (18) Barry Bonds (13) Alan Trammell (13) Roger Clemens (11) Edgar Martinez (10)

Frayed Knot wrote: New Arizona GM Dave Stewart is preemptively on record as saying that the Snakes aren't interested in any of the older NYM pitchers - no Niese, no Gee, and obviously no Colon Me neither.

I voted "like" (but with some reservation) only because 36 year olds (which is what Cuddyer'll be on Opening Day) coming off a mostly missed season fare terribly. But if he doesn't fall apart, if last year's injury isn't a trend that's signaling the rapid decline and end of Cuddyer's career, then he should be much better than the guy he's replacing - Chris Young. I checked out Cuddyer's Coors/road split for his batting champ season of 2013, because I'm incredibly skeptical of anything a Rockie does on offense that appears impressive, without scrutinizing it, myself, and discovered that on the road that season, he batted a very respectable .311. How respectable was that .311? It ranked 8th among all NL'ers (min. 250 PA's). Oh, and two and a half NY Mets also made that top 10 list: [fimg=755:3p44tn2h]https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5614/15576799878_1e9db1c0b7_b.jpg[/fimg:3p44tn2h]

d'Kong76 wrote: Leave me alone, you're starting to creep me out. You've been abusing me for more than six years, even though for most of that time, I barely responded to any of your posts. You're so obsessed with me, that you even make personal comments about me in response to other poster's posts. And this latest instance isn't even the first or second time you pulled that stunt. I think you've got it all mixed up about who should be creeped out by whom. Leave you alone? I did. You still continued with the abuse. You're the one with the problem.

But it looks like the Mets just ain't interested in getting him. Probably 'cause the owners heads would explode if they hafta eat Terry's guaranteed 2015 salary on top of paying Maddon's price. And prolly 'cause Maddon's got the bona fides that he ain't gonna be intimidated by the little dipshit that's running the Mets more and more with each passing day. Bravo! It took a week for the Cubs to get him. While some eat up the drama behind batmag's hatred of his beloved, one has to think he was headed for the Cubs all along if they got things sewed up so quickly; so it really has nothing to do with the Mets or the Wilpons. I think it would be funny if it comes out the Rays gave him permission to seek em- ployment elsewhere, or even funnier if the Cubs tampered. I guess your freakin' head also explodes if someone else here gets some enjoyment from one of my posts. You've managed to turn the Cubs apparent signing of Maddon into a personal thing with me. Don't blame me because the Wilpons reduced the Mets to a laughing stock. I'm just a messenger. And if the Mets never had a chance to get Maddon ... if it turns out that Maddon never wanted to manage a New York City based team that's been mediocre at best for more than half a decade ... if the Mets can't attract the Maddons of baseball, whose fault is that? Nobody's? That isn't more fallout from the owners' incompetence? One first place finish in 26 years. I really didn't deserve such a reaction, and all I said is that you are a little dramatic. Your response solidifies that point. No one here thinks the owner's are competent, and we all realize that sure, there may be guys who don't want to come here. But it looks like the Mets just ain't interested in getting him. Probably not, and I probably wouldn't want to come to a company that just signed the top dog and then fired him for me. That would make me feel real safe. Great way to do biz. Probably 'cause the owners heads would explode if they hafta eat Terry's guaranteed 2015 salary on top of paying Maddon's price. Maybe, but more likely it just makes your head explode thinking about would be and maybe if scenarios that ad- vance your agenda. And prolly 'cause Maddon's got the bona fides that he ain't gonna be intimidated by the little dipshit Terry's intimidated by Jeff? I didn't know. Who looks in- timidated in this pic?: [fimg=375]https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3156/5795583954_e7fc4bd5c4_z.jpg[/fimg] the little dipshit that's running the Mets more and more with each passing day. Decade old news, but nice drama. Sheesh. _______________________________ _______________________________ What does the Maddon signing have to do with my stance on the Wilpons? That sentence you stuck in there with my forum handle (bml) was superfluous and didn't add anything to the Maddon story -- other than showing that someone bravo'ing one of my posts also drives you nuts.You could've wrote the same post without the "bml" sentence and your post would've meant the exact same thing. What were you trying to do? Talk bmfc into editing the "Bravo" out of his post? Besides, he was responding to the post, not the poster. I presume that he would have responded with the same "Bravo" remark no matter who wrote that post. No one here thinks the owner's are competent, and we all realize that .... You could say that about anything. We all know how awesome Tom Seaver was, so don't bother writing about that, because what the hell can you tell us about Seaver that we don't already know? Same for everything else .. Lagares's defense, Bartolo's weight, whatever. Since everyone here is already an expert who knows everything about everything, maybe you shouldn't bother to post anything anymore. Funny how that negative fuck you, pay me Wilpon piece that was posted about 10 minutes ago didn't make you have any seizures. I guess with you, it's not the post, it's the poster.

Edgy MD wrote: I'd rather work within facts. It's much healthier that way. So would I. I did.

The Wilpons were the de facto owners pretty much since the Harazin era.

d'Kong76 wrote: bmfc1 wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: But it looks like the Mets just ain't interested in getting him. Probably 'cause the owners heads would explode if they hafta eat Terry's guaranteed 2015 salary on top of paying Maddon's price. And prolly 'cause Maddon's got the bona fides that he ain't gonna be intimidated by the little dipshit that's running the Mets more and more with each passing day. Bravo! It took a week for the Cubs to get him. While some eat up the drama behind batmag's hatred of his beloved, one has to think he was headed for the Cubs all along if they got things sewed up so quickly; so it really has nothing to do with the Mets or the Wilpons. I think it would be funny if it comes out the Rays gave him permission to seek em- ployment elsewhere, or even funnier if the Cubs tampered. I guess your freakin' head also explodes if someone else here gets some enjoyment from one of my posts. You've managed to turn the Cubs apparent signing of Maddon into a personal thing with me. Don't blame me because the Wilpons reduced the Mets to a laughing stock. I'm just a messenger. And if the Mets never had a chance to get Maddon ... if it turns out that Maddon never wanted to manage a New York City based team that's been mediocre at best for more than half a decade ... if the Mets can't attract the Maddons of baseball, whose fault is that? Nobody's? That isn't more fallout from the owners' incompetence? One first place finish in 26 years.

Ceetar wrote: here. courtesy of The7Line Thanks. All clear.

I'm still all mixed up. How does a white panel stuck on a wall tell me anything? Am I supposed to be able to read the panel for information? And that long metal track in the dirt, just above some vehicle of sorts, what's that? Does that track mark where the wall was for the last three seasons?

Ceetar wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: [fimg=722]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B09DjOxCIAE3Afd.jpg:large[/fimg] Is that "white track" where the new wall will be? Because if so, that looks like a major overhaul of dimensions. What is that ---- 15 ... 20 feet closer? like..4? look at the white on the wall. that's the difference. Ceets, I'm not following you. No comprendo.

[fimg=722:3m66pjkr]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B09DjOxCIAE3Afd.jpg:large[/fimg:3m66pjkr] Is that "white track" where the new wall will be? Because if so, that looks like a major overhaul of dimensions. What is that ---- 15 ... 20 feet closer?

Edgy MD wrote: A lot of BS out there that the Mets not dumping their manager and landing Maddon proves they're not serious. I wouldn't hold it against the Mets for "not landing" Maddon -- so long as the Mets made a good faith effort to land him -- or so long as Maddon made it clear that he just ain't interested in managing the Mets no way no how. But it looks like the Mets just ain't interested in getting him. Probably 'cause the owners heads would explode if they hafta eat Terry's guaranteed 2015 salary on top of paying Maddon's price. And prolly 'cause Maddon's got the bona fides that he ain't gonna be intimidated by the little dipshit that's running the Mets more and more with each passing day.

It's pretty pathetic that I can root for the National League franchise from the greatest city in the world -- a team that hasn't had a top manager in more than ten years and yet just the same, believe that the odds of Maddon coming to manage the Mets are zero.

Who cares how they might market Cuddyer if they actually got him? How does that matter?

I'm gonna flip flop again on Cuddyer. I mean, if he's gonna hit as well as Sage thinks he could, and come as cheap as Leiter thinks he'll likely cost, then yeah, I'm all for it. Even better yet if Cuddyer's gonna hit 40 HR's next year instead of the 20 he's being pegged at. And if he wins the 2015 MVP, then put me down for two thumbs up. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: There is money available, or should be. I can think of worse places to spend it. How're you figgerin'? Are you counting the money that might be freed up if Colon or Murphy or both are jettisoned? Did you get an inside tip from Matt Cerrone? Are you sayin' that the 2015 opening day payroll will be meaningfully greater than 2014's? Because factoring in conservative arb-eligible salary increases, the Mets are already pretty much where they opened last year.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I like Cuddyer, but not head over heels like. But this is where the Mets shop these days, so I understand. Because the Mets are like the Royals. Only without the pennant. And the snazzy scoreboard. No, that wasn't true. Actually, I'm indifferent to Cuddyer. I don't know why I wrote otherwise.

I like Cuddyer, but not head over heels like. But this is where the Mets shop these days, so I understand. Because the Mets are like the Royals. Only without the pennant. And the snazzy scoreboard.

Frayed Knot wrote: "Because the Mets don't have enough of those." Like? I can't get any exaggeration past you.

Here's what's good about the Royals being in the WS: Next season, guess who'll be the team that hasn't won a World Series in 29 years?

Because the Mets don't have enough of those. Michael Cuddyer is a perfect free agent fit for NY Mets, who like him The Mets are highly reluctant to trade any of their young pitchers this winter, despite an urgent need to upgrade the offense. It�s not impossible to imagine Zack Wheeler, Noah Syndergaard, Jacob deGrom and to some extent Rafael Montero playing for different teams next year, but it�s close. So where do they find a bat? Well, here�s an idea, one that that�s already been floated in the blogosphere, and turns out to be a concrete possibility: Free agent Michael Cuddyer, the exact sort of piece that fits the offense the Mets hope to construct. Here�s what we mean by that: While Sandy Alderson has long checked in on the Giancarlo Stantons and Carlos Gonzalezes of the world, he and his staff consider it more likely that the Mets will surround their core of pitchers with a lineup filled veteran, versatile or otherwise interchangeable pieces. Think Tampa Bay Rays, during their good years. Cuddyer is just such a piece. Thirty-five years old, he was injured much of this season, but hit 10 home runs in 49 games, while batting .332. People familiar with the Mets� thinking say that the team considers him attractive on a two-year deal. It is hard to imagine Cuddyer getting more than that, but as one major league executive notes about the Mets� top free agent target last year, �No one thought Jhonny Peralta was going to get four years, either.� The Cardinals shocked the Mets, and most of baseball, by giving Peralta a four-year, $52 million deal. If Cuddyer�s market does not inflate in a similar way, he could provide much-needed power for the Mets, a tremendous clubhouse presence to assume some of the leadership burden from his friend David Wright -- and all at a commitment that does not require excessive years, or the loss of a pitching prospect. It�s not that the Mets refuse to trade any of their pitchers not named Gee, Niese or Colon; it�s just that they are highly reluctant. Over the past 12 months, Wheeler went from sort of available, with some in the organization pushing hard to move him, to virtually untouchable. Syndergaard had a disappointing year at Triple-A, but remains young and promising. DeGrom is about to win the National League rookie of the year award, so he isn�t going anywhere. Scouts rate Montero a notch below the others, but sources say that the Mets are reluctant to part with him, too. He could be had in the right deal (Yoenis Cespedes, perhaps, who the Mets are monitoring?), but is far from on the market. Expect the Mets to explore many different trade options this winter. Rumors will arise, and many will be based in fact. We�ll even present some concrete possibilities here, over the next days and weeks. But two years of control over a veteran hitter like Cuddyer, at a rate that will not bust their tight budget -- well, that fits the plan better than many other choices. http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/baseballinsider/michael-cuddyer-perfect-free-agent-fit-ny-mets-blog-entry-1.1984031

What I'm saying is that cavernous parks that suppress offense to a large degree neutralize the home team's pitching and power hitting advantages. Therefore, a big market team should never play in a cavernous park, because a big market team, given its economic advantage, is likelier to be a good team*. Extreme pitcher's parks undermine the home team's superiority. A perennially bad team, however, might be better off in a cavernous stadium so as to drag down the competition to their crappy level of play. * "Big market" team, as used here, is synonymous with a wealthy team that can outspend most of its competitors. As a fan of the present Mets, I should know better.

Topps awarded their trophy to Seaver. So it's Seaver 2 - Hughes 1.

The team thrives on adversity. When the Cardinals lost the services of Bob Gibson with a broken leg (suffered on July 15 when he was hit by a line drive from the bat of Roberto Clemente), their uncertain pitching was supposed to cave in. Gibson, who was throwing batting practice on Aug. 28, may not get back into the rotation until the middle of September, but his absence enabled Nelson Briles, a 24-year-old right-hander with a discouraging record of 4-15 last year, to start, and Briles has done splendidly. Briles uses the no-windup style that Pitching Coach Billy Muffett teaches so well�as do Relief Pitcher Ron Willis (three earned runs in his past 19 appearances) and Starter Dick Hughes. Early in the year Hughes appeared in 10 games as a relief pitcher, but since he became a starting pitcher his record is 13-4. At the age of 29 he could win the league's Rookie of the Year award.

Dick Hughes wouldn't have been a crazy pick for ROY. That race was close. Hughes set the Cards rookie record for most K's in a game (13), later tied by Scipio Spinks against the Mets. I thought Hughes sustained his rotator cuff injury in Spring Training '68, but I could be wrong on that. In 1968, that injury was the kiss of death for a pitcher, and so Hughes was essentially done.