batmagadanleadoff

Frayed Knot wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: I would have preferred a give-away where they offered Karen Velez bobble-boob dolls. What part of her would you like to be bobbling?

It's a Superman! It's a plane! No. It's Byrd!

And there'll be a Doctor in the House... Mets to celebrate Doc with bobblehead giveaway Sunday By Chris Iseman / MLB.com | 7/20/2013 2:38 P.M. ET NEW YORK -- Dwight Gooden will be celebrated before Sunday's game against the Phillies, as New York will be giving away Gooden bobbleheads courtesy of Gold's Horseradish to the first 25,000 fans who arrive at Citi Field. Gooden, who went 157-85 for the Mets from 1984 through 1994, will also be signing copies of his book "Doc: A Memoir" outside the Mets Team Store in the Jackie Robinson Rotunda from noon until 1 p.m. ET. Gooden represented the Mets at several events during All-Star week, including a field renovation in the Rockaways and a little league game for special needs children at Citi Field. http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130720&content_id=54160620&notebook_id=54160550&vkey=notebook_nym&c_id=nym

Gil had two pitchers on his staff who would've been perfectly suited for long relief: Nolan Ryan, who had not yet transitioned to pure starting pitcher and essentially was their long RH reliever in '69, and Tug McGraw, who had not yet fully transitioned to pure reliever, and even spot started a few games in '69. But your post opens up another can of worms. The relief pitchers union that would one day successfully brainwash almost all of baseball and decree that the best relief pitchers must only pitch the 9th inning because the accumulation of their saves takes precedence over the goals of the team had not yet been born. That union couldn't exist in 1969 because Gil's players (like all the other players) were still slaves with no leverage, bound to the owners' interpretation of the reserve clause. So maybe this premise should be rephrased to ask what would Gil have done if the 1969 NL had to play their season under today's conditions.

Interesting that you more or less kept the entire infield intact, cutting loose both Gaspar and Pfeil. It makes sense -- Pfeil was a luxury, especially with a five man bench. By the way, this exercise isn't limited to the playoffs. The pitch count enforcement would've likely hit the '69 Mets the hardest during the regular season by undermining their strongest asset -- starting pitching. Seaver, Koosman and Gentry would've probably pitched, collectively, 100 fewer innings. I'd bet that a good chunk of those innings would've gone to Dilauro.

Swan Swan H wrote: Turner not activated, the bench consists of Brown, Recker, Lagares and Satin. All righties - a pox on the evil Bastardo. You deserve a gold star just for being able to identify the Mets bench. When I was a kid, a bench was typically seven, sometimes eight players -- as many subs as starters. Swan Swan H wrote: Very true. It was easy to platoon at a couple of positions when you have practically another full squad to call on, and probably more necessary to keep guys fresh. It's actually much easier these days to name a team's bench. The tougher assignment is keeping the entire bullpen straight. These posts in tonight's IGT thread got me to wondering how Gil Hodges would have managed the champion 1969 Mets if pitch counts were in vogue in 1969 and strictly enforced, thus requiring a team to carry more pitchers than were actually needed back then. The 1969 Mets, playing in today's environment, would be assisted by the fact that a greater percentage of teams now qualifiy for the expanded wild card playoffs. Thus, today, a team that on paper, could be reasonably expected to win about 85 games is a contender. Not so in 1969, when you probably needed to field a team that could be expected to win 90+ games to contend, maybe closer to 95 wins in a tough division. Today's pitch counts - necessitating a smaller bench - would have probably hampered the 1969 's WS champion Mets to a greater degree than their rivals because of the extent to which Hodges platooned his players. The 1969 Cubs, on the other hand, might've been the greatest beneficiaries of today's pitch count system because their starting eight were essentially the same starting eight all season long: the 1969 Cubs were a team built around stars and excellent every day players, much more so than the '69 Mets, who overcame that particular Cubs advantage with a deeper bench and deeper front-line pitching. Here are the '69 Mets who received the most playing time, in descending order, according to PA's: 1. Agee-635 2. Jones-558 3. Harrelson-457 4. Garrett-454 5. Grote-406 6. Boswell-405 7. Kranepool-396 8. Swoboda-375 9. Shamsky-349 10. Weis-269 11. Gaspar-250 12. Clendenon-226 13. Pfeil-223 14. Martin-192 15. Charles-189 16. Otis-102 17. Dyer-79 18. Collins-43 19. Gosger-16 20. Heise-13 Clendenon was acquired at the trading deadline (6/15/69) so prorating his PA's by team games, he'd appear higher up on the list. J.C. Martin, the 14th most used Met in '69 would nevertheless be a mandatory roster inclusion even with a tiny modern bench, as he was the 2d string catcher. It appears that one player from each of these two groups --Charles/Weis and Gaspar/Pfeil -- would've had to have been jettisoned due to roster size restrictions. This would give Hodges a five man bench, assuming Otis through Heise are merely sporadic callups used to replace injured or military dutied Mets, which is pretty much how Otis through Heise were actually used in '69.

You deserve a gold star just for being able to identify the Mets bench. When I was a kid, a bench was typically seven, sometimes eight players -- as many subs as starters.

Swan Swan H wrote: I wouldn't trade Citi for Shea under any circumstances. Form or function? Citi functions better than Shea, no doubt about that. Not that I'm impressed. Citi's almost 50 years newer than Shea: it oughtta function better. Citi's also almost 20 years newer than Camden Yards, and you'd hardly know it. Aesthetically, Citi's an unimaginative mish mash of mismatched pieces. Neyer's the first journalist I read who noted the wackiness of placing two giant scoreboards so close to each other. I always thought that their absurd placement was a domino effect necessitated to adjust for a bad bowl design. But Neyer writes that the ugly scoreboards were placed to take advantage of the highway traffic facing the stadium. I'm not surprised and on second thought, it makes sense to me. Besides, Citi's bowl doesn't appear so much different from other new baseball stadiums. I could go on, as Neyer does, noting some other of what I agree are missed opportunities. Like the so called Museum and Hall of Fame, a dinky exhibit, neglected more and more with each passing season, and erected only after the owners were shamed into doing so. I'm sure the Wilpons are still stewing over all of that wasted space that isn't generating revenue for the sale of more $50.00 t-shirts. How much you wanna bet that Jeff Wilpon's wife's walk-in closet is bigger than that Museum.

Boyer and Fregosi, the latter I got thanks to your hint.

Spahn, Berra and Mays?

Ceetar wrote: everything within the actual budget of the Mets is Sandy's call. But was that the point? eff n Jeff can't lay it on Sandy for not spending in excess of a budget that they, eff and Jeff, set.

Vic Sage wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: None. Talk to me in another decade about #5 And, while we're at it, put the unofficially retired 8 & 24 back into circulation. This... exactly this. I missed FK's post about re-circulating 8 & 24. Sign me up for that, too.

Doesn't anybody read this guy anymore? He's claiming access to an inside Mets source and wishes he could write happier Mets stories.

I like the way this survey is phrased. I think it's kinda pointless to ask which number or numbers the team (owners) should retire because here, there are no rules. The owners are free to retire whatever number or numbers they wish to retire, whether it's Mike Piazza'a old uni or Jay Kleven's. It's their team and these decisions are some of the spoils. When we engage in this uni retirement talk, what we're really wondering or debating, is what numbers we would retire if we owned the team. So with that out of the way, if I owned the Mets, the only numbers I'd retire are 31 for Piazza and 17 for Keith. Next in line for consideration only, would be Doc and Darryl's unis followed by Koosman's. I'm not considering numbers of active players. I don't say that I'd retire 16 or 18 or 36, but that if there was some hierarchy or imaginary line of consideration, the last three would be at the front of my line. I shouldn't be surprised at how often Gary Carter's name comes up in this topic of conversation but I just don't see it. His Met legacy, in my eyes, is crucial - Carter was historically, one of the most important Mets in franchise history, no doubt, but at the same time, his Mets legacy is vastly overstated, and at the expense of the legacies of other Mets.

Fred extols in the Times. Wilpon Extols Mets� Finances and Future By RICHARD SANDOMIR Fred Wilpon ... Of General Manager Sandy Alderson, who is now in his third season of rebuilding, Wilpon said, �We haven�t turned him down on anything.� I caught this quote when I first read the NYT piece on eff Wilpon's latest State of the Mets Finances MetSpeak and thought to myself, that it reads as if eff is laying all of the responsibility for the team's drastically lowered payroll on Sandy the Slave GM. Not surprisingly, H, Megdal is the only writer who picks up on that quote, and spins it into an entire piece: Mets owners blame their stinginess, bafflingly, on the general manager By Howard Megdal 11:19 am Jul. 18, 2013 While Mets fans were enjoying Matt Harvey, David Wright and the Major League Baseball All-Star Game at Citi Field, Fred and Jeff Wilpon were busy assuring the public, as they've done periodically since they fell hopelessly into debt, that some spending from ownership was just around the corner. This time, what they said effectively pitted them against their own baseball operations department, and against general manager Sandy Alderson's declaration of principles last month. Within the owners' generically positive comments were some clear indicators that these promises to spend aren't any different than those that came last year, or the year before, or the year before that. �I think Sterling�s position is excellent,� Fred Wilpon said in reference to the Mets' parent company, Sterling Equities. �The Mets� business is excellent.� Of course, Newsday had published an article that very day pointing out that the Mets' business is not, in fact, excellent. Revenues are half of what was projected back in 2009. Attendance is well below what even Standard and Poor's had projected when they lowered their bond rating on the team's stadium debt last December. The Mets' business has pretty much been the opposite of excellent ever since Bernie Madoff wrecked the Wilpons' finances. But that article only put some specific numbers to what we already knew. The team lost $23 million last season. And despite offering access to the All-Star Game as an incentive for season-ticket holders, overall attendance in 2013 is down nearly eight percent over last season at this time. The drop is likely to get steeper without the All-Star Game carrot. But while this doesn't help on issues like revenue to increase payroll next season, it is a separate question from the larger picture of Sterling as a whole, which looks much worse. As Wilpon told Richard Sandomir in the Times on Monday, the Mets have not re-financed the $320 million debt, taken against their ownership stake in the team, which is due in June 2014. The problem, beyond an inability to pay it back, is that JPMorgan Chase has a clear incentive not to push back the timeline of the loan, which could put them in line behind the more than $600 million debt Wilpon and his partners now owe against their ownership stake in S.N.Y., and which is due in 2015. Previously, JPMorgan Chase pushed back against allowing David Einhorn's proposed deal to put Einhorn ahead of them in line among the Sterling debt collectors. A similar objection led to the Mets structuring David Wright's contract extension last winter so that the invaluable third baseman's compensation actually went down between the date signed and the June 2014 due date. So yes, significant money is coming off the payroll this winter, just as more than $50 million did following the 2011 season. But ownership's position makes payroll money-in/money-out a largely irrelevant question. Instead, with that principal coming due, any spending needs to happen in conjunction with, or following, JPMorgan Chase allowing it to happen. The true hurdle for ownership: saying to their creditor, We can't pay you $320 million next June. But in the meantime, we'd like to pay Shin-Soo Choo $80 million. In the meantime, Wilpon and son seem to be laying the groundwork for blaming Alderson, rather than their precarious finances, for the coming winter. They are apparently sticking with the cover story that unlike every general manager in baseball history, Sandy Alderson prefers not to have a larger budget to improve his team. �We haven�t turned him down on anything," Fred Wilpon said of Alderson, who last August described a need for "an infusion of players, productive players" and then repeatedly joked about his outfield before adding a total of two free agents on major league contracts totaling $5 million, both pitchers, both no longer on the active roster. In a recent background conversation about the owner's comments, a source close to Alderson told me they were "ridiculous," and expressed bafflement that Wilpon had appeared to lay blame for the Mets' lack of spending on the general manager. "I think we all know he�s turned down more than one move," the source said. "Not even sure what he means." Wilpon, for the record, didn't just say that Alderson had chosen not to spend more money. When asked whether he would return the payroll, currently at approximately $90 million (by counting deferred money to Wright and Jason Bay as a 2013 expense) to the $140 million mark of a few seasons ago, Wilpon said this: "I asked Sandy about that. He said he couldn�t invest that much money.� Jeff Wilpon, the chief operating officer of the New York Mets and son of Fred, piled on in an appearance on Mike Francesa's show, where he said that the Mets, under Alderson, are "a little behind where I thought we'd be." This, despite the fact that overall payroll size hasn't just limited Alderson's options, but has shifted so frequently that Alderson's department can't plan for the medium-term, instead forced to make each move in a vacuum. "We haven't set a payroll for next year," Wilpon told Francesa, pushing back against Alderson's $90-100 million figure from last month. "But I can tell you, we're ready to invest. With those big contracts coming off the books, we have the money to invest." That was precisely the argument the younger Wilpon made a few months into Alderson's tenure, back in January 2011. It was never about team payroll, and that hasn't changed. As team ownership heads into a winter when it needs to account not just for service on its mountain of debts, but the coming due date for a debt itself, what happens next won't be determined by baseball operations, which still hasn't gotten the particulars for winter budgeting more than a month into the six-month timespan Alderson described last month as critical. As another member of the Mets' hierarchy put it to me when I suggested I'd like to write more happy stories about the team, like the kind Matt Harvey has provided every fifth day, he held up his hands and said, "One day at a time." http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2013/07/8532016/mets-owners-blame-their-stinginess-bafflingly-general-manager

"And what's with all this talk about retiring Gary Carter's number? What the hell did he ever do for the Mets that I didn't do ten times over? Retire my number, Jeff!"

"Pettitte's got nothin' on me. And I played for the Mets. Retire my number, Jeff!"

Somebody else should say it because I get shit for just about everything I write, but this Harvey is on some douchebag streak as of late Mets' Harvey says he envies Jeter's prowess with beautiful women POST STAFF REPORT Last Updated: 3:33 PM, July 17, 2013 Posted: 2:09 PM, July 17, 2013 Mets pitcher Matt Harvey arrives with his girlfriend, Sports Illustrated swimsuit model Anne Vyalitsyna, for the All Star Game Parade on Tuesday. Matt Harvey envies Derek Jeter � especially when it comes to the ladies. The Mets pitching phenom told Men�s Journal that he wants the kind of love life Jeter has had for years in New York City, complete with the gorgeous celebrities and uncanny privacy. "That guy is the model," Harvey said. "I mean, first off, let's just look at the women he's dated. Obviously, he goes out � he's meeting these girls somewhere � but you never hear about it. That's where I want to be." Harvey isn't doing too badly in that department -- he's currently dating Sports Illustrated swimsuit model Anne Vyalitsyna. Though he hasn't exactly kept things as quiet as Jeter with Anne V joining Harvey on his All-Star Parade on Tuesday. Also, Jeter never posed nude for ESPN's "Body Issue," like the Mets ace did. Harvey, who lives in the East Village, is enjoying the Manhattan lifestyle with plenty of fancy restaurants, clubs, bars and parties. The 24-year-old does say he doesn�t drink 48 hours before a start. �But those other days? Yes, I'm gonna go out,� he said. �If I was locked up in my house all week, I don't know what I'd be like on the baseball field." In his younger days: Derek Jeter and ex-girlfriend, actress Jordana Brewster in 2002 at a Nets game. Harvey, originally from Connecticut, is still on his rookie contract, but he�s likely to sign a lucrative extension with the Mets some time soon. The team would be crazy to let go of the fireballing right-hander, who started Tuesday night�s All-Star Game at Citi Field and threw 2 1/3 shutout innings. "No matter what, New York is now my home," he says, finishing the night's last drink. "I could buy a place now, but I've gotta wait for that $200 million contract. If I'm going to buy an apartment, it has to be the best apartment in the city." That competitiveness certainly extends off the field. The 6-foot-4, 225-pound Harvey has befriended Rangers goalie Henrik Lundqvist, noted for his stylish clothing, and high-end John Varvatos has become one of Harvey�s favorite stores. "He always makes the best-dressed lists," Harvey said of Lundqvist. "Well, I want to be on those lists." The list of baseball�s best pitchers is not enough. Along with Rangers like Lundqvist and Brian Boyle, Harvey hangs out in the city with finance and marketing 20-somethings. "Baseball is my job, and I love it," Harvey said. "But it can't be the only thing I've got going on." http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/mets_harvey_says_he_envies_jeter_xlU737sieMFdoeBc2SMbCO

Megdal not so mean to the Mets, but only because most of his ASG column is devoted to Mariano Rivera A night at Citi Field starts with Harvey, ends with Rivera By Howard Megdal 9:54 am Jul. 17, 2013 Three pitches into Matt Harvey's night, what was supposed to be the crown jewel of the New York Mets' baseball season threatened to turn into a debacle in line with, well, much of the team's history over the past half-dozen years. Mike Trout lined Harvey's first pitch down the right field line for a double. Robinson Cano took a ball, then Harvey drilled him in what looked to be his knee. Cano, after some time to recover, head down, hobbled to first base. Harvey faced Miguel Cabrera, who has an O.P.S.+ this season of 201 (Babe Ruth's career O.P.S.+ is 206) with two on and none out. "That was when I knew I was going to have to buckle down," Harvey told reporters during his post-start press conference, after he did just that and a good bit more in the 84th Major League Baseball All-Star Game at Citi Field Tuesday night, ultimately won by the American League, 3-0. "The last thing I wanted to do was go 3-0 with no outs in the All Star Game. I knew I had to make good pitches, and luckily, throwing to the best catcher in the game, that makes it a lot easier." These are the strange, temporary loyalties formed by the All-Star Game. Harvey's cushion was Yadier Molina, also known as the man who ruined the Mets' 2006 season when he homered off Aaron Heilman in Game 7 of the N.L.C.S. It's been nearly seven years, and Harvey was in high school at the time, but Molina was lustily booed during introductions. Still, the crowd was silent, pondering how things had deteriorated so fast. Just a few minutes before, the baseball world looked to belong to Harvey, who received the loudest cheers, louder than even the longtime Met David Wright, as he fired warmup pitches from the right field foul line, bathed in early-evening sunlight. Mets fans know how unsure a sure thing can be, thanks to things like the 2007 and 2008 seasons. But if a Harvey meltdown would have fit into the recent history of his ballclub, what happened next is entirely how events have unfolded for Harvey. Harvey switched from his fastball to his slider, getting ahead of Cabrera with one, and ultimately striking him out with another. Harvey went on to pitch flawlessly, striking out three over two scoreless innings. He touched 99 with his fastball, and allowed the largest audience, by far, to ever watch him pitch see a bit of what has Mets fans so besotted. Better still, Harvey himself gave an all-clear on the blister which had led to some recent outings that made Harvey look practically mortal. "No, it's healed up pretty great," Harvey said about his blister. "It feels fine. I was able to finally throw my slider again, so that was definitely a big help, and you know, I'm glad everything's healthy going into the second half." Harvey's diagnosis was backed up by empirical evidence. In his last start, he threw just four of 12 sliders for strikes, uncharacteristic for Harvey. Tuesday night, seven of his ten sliders were strikes. So as the American League scored single runs in fourth, fifth and eighth, it was up to Robinson Cano to assure the world that he was fine. Cano was all smiles when he met the media in-game, explaining that the injury was to his quadriceps muscle, the X-rays were negative, and it didn't even hurt that much. "In the beginning, it just felt a little tight," Cano said, speaking at an in-game press conference. "I didn't want to aggravate it in that situation." But as Cano's presser went on, he said the injury didn't hurt much, by the end it didn't hurt at all, and when finally asked again how it felt right now, he answered brightly, "Good!" As always, see him back on the field to judge properly. While the National League could only muster a pair of hits from current Mets great David Wright and former Mets great Carlos Beltran through eight innings, what began at Citi Field as a celebration of two Mets became a tribute to one Yankee: Mariano Rivera. He didn't actually get to save the game: American League manager Jim Leyland didn't want to take a chance that his team would enter a ninth inning trailing, thus eliminating a bottom of the ninth and keeping Rivera from pitching in his final All-Star Game. Had the American League held an eight or ten-run lead, Leyland said later, he'd have saved Rivera for the ninth, but then, that wouldn't have been a save anyway. According to Leyland, his players were in the dark, too. "Well, I actually kind of lied to the players," Leyland, still in his uniform, told a gathering of reporters from a podium at his postgame press conference. "I said, 'I'm not a motivational speaker, but my motivation is to work our fannies off to get to the ninth inning and bring in the greatest closer of all time. I did lie a little bit, one inning, but for obvious reasons, I hope you all understand that. If something freaky would've happened in the eighth, where they'd scored some runs or taken the lead, there wouldn't have been a ninth." And in Leyland's mind, as the American League headed to the bottom of the eighth with a 3-0 lead, things were still sufficiently tight that he had to go with his best guy. It was time for Rivera. Never mind that he also had Joe Nathan and his 1.36 E.R.A. at his disposal. He'd been burned too many times, as my colleague Emma Span said, by watching Jose Valverde pitch this season for the Tigers. Leyland did this with Rivera's approval. In fact, Leyland's respect for Rivera was so great that something he said to Leyland during the Yankees' last series in Detroit made Leyland choke up, and then again as he recounted the moment, while vowing he'd never tell anyone what it was. It's as if Rivera's words possess the same magical properties as his pitches, which somehow got better as he aged. So in came Rivera an inning early, alone from the bullpen to the mound, while a Citi Field crowd which had lustily booed Phillies and Braves representatives cheered him. He was a Yankee, but he was also the greatest relief pitcher of all time, in his final season. "It's been an amazing night, a great event," a clearly moved Rivera said, his wife close next to him, three children standing behind them. "Has been amazing. I have no words for it." As Rivera warmed up, it was just him and the catcher, while the other players remained in the dugout, allowing him a singular moment. Rivera said afterward that the moment, like so much else, was unexpected. "Everything has been a surprise this night. When I was crossing the field, when I got to the mound, first, hearing the song, that I pitch [to]," referring to Enter Sandman, by Metallica, (which technically was Billy Wagner's first, but never mind that now). "I don't usually hear that song in other stadiums. ... That was great, and then when I got to the mound, I saw both teams out of the dugout, cheering and applauding there. It almost made me cry. ... I will never forget that." Rivera came in and did what he does, throwing 11 of 16 pitches for strikes in a scoreless eighth. An inning later, Joe Nathan, of Middletown, N.Y. Babe Ruth League, Pine Bush High School and SUNY-Stonybrook, logged the final three outs. But there was little doubt that Rivera would get the M.V.P. award, an unusual honor for somebody who, ultimately, logged a hold. Rivera, said to be endlessly devoted to his family and many other off-field causes that should allow him a seamless transition to post-baseball life, isn't retiring because of any decline in performance. He's been better in his 40s than his 30s, just as he was better in his 30s than his 20s. And in his 20s, incidentally, he pitched to an E.R.A.+ of 182, earned two top-three Cy Young Award vote finishes, and closed for three World Series-winning teams. A reporter asked him after the game just how long he thought he could pitch if family and life were not an issue. Rivera laughed. "I don't want to think about it," he said, with a familiar smile. "Because I might change my mind." More seriously, he added, "No, no, like I said before spring training, I think that the bullets are getting short. I mean, that's all I have. I don't have nothing left. I'm giving everything that I have." He spoke for another ten minutes after that, and when he was finished, the jaded New York press crew gave him a round of applause, and crowded around Rivera and his family to take pictures and offer him congratulations on a career coming to an end on Rivera's own terms. http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2013/07/8531941/night-citi-field-starts-harvey-ends-rivera?top-featured-1

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Who cares Who do you think you are? Me?