batmagadanleadoff

Edgy MD wrote: [fimg=200]http://metvnetwork.com/assets/facebook/408/thumbnail/dm.jpg[/fimg] +[/bigpurple] [fimg=200]http://integrationacres.com/products/images/goat_1.jpg[/fimg]+[/bigpurple] [fimg=200]http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080823233621/uncyclopedia/images/7/70/The_fonz_thumbs_up.jpg[/fimg] [fimg=222]http://jenntgrace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/4.png[/fimg]

Butch Benton is the catcher of the future. I'm still banking on that breakout year. Him or Luis Rosado What? No Ike Hampton? I wonder which of those three had more appearances in the future stars section of Mets yearbooks? Here's the LHP and RHP answers to this quiz:

G-Fafif wrote: That was tough. My three would-be guesses yielded one right answer (Pfeil). Don't see Jay Bell or Butch Benton up there. Bell missed the top 10 by a few players, and Benton only had 25 Mets AB's. The 10th ranking player on the list, Amos Otis, was homerless in 152 Mets AB's, edging Kevin Baez by one at bat.

Ceetar wrote: yes, but, what about Mets seasons instead of Mets careers? Whaddya mean? Most seasons w/o a HR? Season record for most AB's w/o a HR? Something else?

If I was taking this quiz, I'd only know three of the answers for sure. Otherwise, I'd be making educated guesses. Anyways, last season, Matt den Dekker had more at bats than any other Met who did not hit a HR. And that's the theme of this quiz. We're looking for the 10 players with the most career Mets at-bats who never homered for the franchise. Position players only, because, as you would imagine, the list is dominated by pitchers, and I'm not interested in listing the pitchers because they're, generally, not expected to hit HR's, even though some of them had enough Mets AB's to hit one or two. OK, what the hell -- for extra credit, gimme the Mets LHP and RHP record setters for this quiz category. Edgy's Quiz Taking Rules. One guess per post. No consecutive guesses/picks. DIFFICULTY RATING: DIFFICULT Here are your most prolific unprolific Mets career HR hitters, ranked by # of AB's, in descending order. Thank you for playing. [fimg=253]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ha2m93p2m6U/UmjaESFjKUI/AAAAAAAAHAk/zfhdo74wEJw/s1600/69AOTIS.bmp[/fimg]

I think I'm gonna post the answers in a little while. Any objections?

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: It's been done. When I get home, I'll post the image. (But it doesn't cover Shea's entire history. ) Yup! I have that one, too. I don't think it gets out of the 1980s. Could you post it? I can't find that image on my PC.

Fman99 wrote: Jason Tyner No HR's, but few AB's.

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Timo Perez? Timo. Ti-No! 18 lifetime Mets HR's.

If I was taking this quiz, I'd only know three of the answers for sure. Otherwise, I'd be making educated guesses. Anyways, last season, Matt den Dekker had more at bats than any other Met who did not hit a HR. And that's the theme of this quiz. We're looking for the 10 players with the most career Mets at-bats who never homered for the franchise. Position players only, because, as you would imagine, the list is dominated by pitchers, and I'm not interested in listing the pitchers because they're, generally, not expected to hit HR's, even though some of them had enough Mets AB's to hit one or two. OK, what the hell -- for extra credit, gimme the Mets LHP and RHP record setters for this quiz category. Edgy's Quiz Taking Rules. One guess per post. No consecutive guesses/picks. DIFFICULTY RATING: DIFFICULT

Gwreck wrote: Rey "the Barber" Sanchez? Edgy's rules.

If I was taking this quiz, I'd only know three of the answers for sure. Otherwise, I'd be making educated guesses. Anyways, last season, Matt den Dekker had more at bats than any other Met who did not hit a HR. And that's the theme of this quiz. We're looking for the 10 players with the most career Mets at-bats who never homered for the franchise. Position players only, because, as you would imagine, the list is dominated by pitchers, and I'm not interested in listing the pitchers because they're, generally, not expected to hit HR's, even though some of them had enough Mets AB's to hit one or two. OK, what the hell -- for extra credit, gimme the Mets LHP and RHP record setters for this quiz category. Edgy's Quiz Taking Rules. One guess per post. No consecutive guesses/picks. DIFFICULTY RATING: DIFFICULT

Edgy MD wrote: Kevin Baez, Wilpon alma mater buddy. Ranks 11th among Mets position players.

If I was taking this quiz, I'd only know three of the answers for sure. Otherwise, I'd be making educated guesses. Anyways, last season, Matt den Dekker had more at bats than any other Met who did not hit a HR. And that's the theme of this quiz. We're looking for the 10 players with the most career Mets at-bats who never homered for the franchise. Position players only, because, as you would imagine, the list is dominated by pitchers, and I'm not interested in listing the pitchers because they're, generally, not expected to hit HR's, even though some of them had enough Mets AB's to hit one or two. OK, what the hell -- for extra credit, gimme the Mets LHP and RHP record setters for this quiz category. Edgy's Quiz Taking Rules. One guess per post. No consecutive guesses/picks. DIFFICULTY RATING: DIFFICULT The record holder, even including pitchers.

Frayed Knot wrote: Frank Taveres Hit his lone Met HR against Mike Lacoss and the Reds on 6/18/79.

Gwreck wrote: Al Leiter, your LHP with the most Mets ABs and no homers. No, but Leiter ranks third among all pitchers on this list.

If I was taking this quiz, I'd only know three of the answers for sure. Otherwise, I'd be making educated guesses. Anyways, last season, Matt den Dekker had more at bats than any other Met who did not hit a HR. And that's the theme of this quiz. We're looking for the 10 players with the most career Mets at-bats who never homered for the franchise. Position players only, because, as you would imagine, the list is dominated by pitchers, and I'm not interested in listing the pitchers because they're, generally, not expected to hit HR's, even though some of them had enough Mets AB's to hit one or two. OK, what the hell -- for extra credit, gimme the Mets LHP and RHP record setters for this quiz category. Edgy's Quiz Taking Rules. One guess per post. No consecutive guesses/picks. DIFFICULTY RATING: DIFFICULT

Zvon wrote: Zvon wrote: Wow. These Royals are for real! They answer right back in the 1st. Knocks the Laa's pitcher right off the mound already. Holy schmoly! 3-1 KC in the 1st. These Royals are freakin' stunning. If you were watching earlier, one of the talking heads on TV did use the word "stunning". I chuckled. I can't prove this, so I'll probably get it for saying so, but I believe that the media's using the word "stunning" to describe the Royals in this series, simply because they're ahead of the Angels -- i.e., the wild card survivor beating the team with baseball's best record. They'd describe the series as stunning even if the Royals beat the Angels three games to two.

This quiz is gonna be so tough, I'm wondering whether I should just post the answers as a list. As soon as more than two correct answers get posted, I'm getting out my side-eye glance.

Zvon wrote: Wow. These Royals are for real! They answer right back in the 1st. Knocks the Laa's pitcher right off the mound already. Holy schmoly! 3-1 KC in the 1st. These Royals are freakin' stunning.

Zvon wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Fail. Maybe. Whatever. Once again, Schaefer is not meant to be a scientific way of evaluating player performances. It's just for fun, a revival of something from the 1970's. Or... you can think of it as a cumulative stat. Colon led the team in Schaefer points, just like he did in innings pitched. Sure, deGrom had a better year, but you wouldn't give him the Innings Pitched title, would you? Kinda harsh Bats. This is done for fun. And make-believe beer. IMO Colon does deserve it. He was here to anchor the staff, win hopefully half his games, and put those innings in his belly.... I know it's for fun. And we once had this discussion. Implementing an accurate scoring system would make the process extremely tedious and suck out most of the fun. I know that. But still, you get to gave your fun, and I get to thumb my nose when Colon emerges as the undeserving 2014 Pitcher of the Year. Think of poor old Jacob deGrom. How do you think he feels getting gypped out of an award he should've won? It's not all about Bartolo. That's how things work. "Pitcher of the Year" implies "best pitcher", not "most often used pitcher". And I get to have my cake and eat it, too. I get to enjoy the super duper retro '70's style cards Grimm puts out, and get to point out the major flaws in the system. And I get to do all this even though I haven't cast a single Schaefer vote this season. So who has it better than me?

It's been done. When I get home, I'll post the image. (But it doesn't cover Shea's entire history. )

Me too.

Frayed Knot wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Agreed. I wouldn't think that it's even money whether or not the Royals sweep. Then you probably shouldn't have gone out of your way to quote and object to the specific sentence with the adjective 'stunning' in it only to totally ignore the noun, sweep, that it was attached to. In doing so you were arguing against a point that wasn't being made. Depends on your point of view. All the Royals have to do to sweep is win the next game, which if you ask me, is, more or less, a 50-50 proposition. That the Royals won the first two games, doesn't, in and of itself, make it less likelier that they'll win the next game. But, yes, I agree that going into the series, a sweep was unlikely, not just by the Royals, but by any team, in any series.

Agreed. I wouldn't think that it's even money whether or not the Royals sweep. Or whether or not the Angels sweep. But the Royals winning the series? I'd say it's a lot closer to even money than the odds reflect.