batmagadanleadoff

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Yeah Walt was the worst. Just how bad he was was more difficult for me to pick up till this last rewatch Yeah, but I was agreeing with you about Todd/Plemons being the stone-cold psychopath.

=Cowtipper post_id=157819 time=1717541752 user_id=166] Murphy, a Florida kid, gets out of a city of 7 million for a city with 650,000 and turns it on.

That's my understanding, too.

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Todd might have been the most depraved of all BB characters. Kid killer, cop-killer, slave keeper, nazi or nazi sympathizer. But he had a soft spot for Lydia He had a soft spot for Walter White, too. But that dude was one stone-cold heartless monster.

=Cowtipper post_id=157827 time=1717543151 user_id=166] 2008-2015: 109 OPS+ 2016-2017: 145 OPS+ 2018-2020: 91 OPS+ Yes, very fluky.

He was 34 years old when he went into decline. With a very bad injury history. And lotsa wear and tear from playing second base. Are you saying that playing at MVP caliber lever for close to three seasons was fluky? That would've been some luck. Maybe his body began to betray him, like it eventually betrays everybody, to the point that he could no longer do what his mind was telling him he ought to be doing. He was already 30 years old when he seemed to have finally figured it out. That's very late in baseball years. I'd like to be 18 years old all over again with what I now know.

Murphy was already doing it in NY. What do you think that playoff run of HR's in six straight games was all about? Murphy was en fuego by the last third of the season but nobody was noticing because Yoenis Cespedes and his Babe Ruth imitation thoroughly overshadowed whatever Murphy (and anybody else) was doing.

If I waited for the Plemons reference, I would've known right away.

I had to google "Todd from Breaking Bad" and I'm certain that I've seen every single BB episode at least half a dozen times. Boy did I love that show. I'm getting old.

[fIMG=555]https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/2018/Topps-Heritage---Base---100th-Anniversary/2/League-Leaders---Charlie-Blackmon-Justin-Turner-Daniel-Murphy.jpg?id=3a47a76e-84ff-4f8a-b26e-b609d0ef94df&size=original[/fIMG]

Daniel Murphy reinvented himself during the 2014-15 offseason. He became a different player, with a different swing and a different approach. Murphy's biggest inspiration? Justin Turner, who, a year earlier, underwent the exact same metamorphosis as soon as the Mets cut ties with him. This is all so much more nuanced than simply reading the back of the baseball card. And we're surely missing most of the info we'd need to make these guesses.

Of course, when I wrote "three year plan ", I was writing like from the mindset of the olden days. Because what is a three year plan today when 40% of the teams make the playoffs?

If the Mets are still where they are now come the trade deadline, it seems they're going to go into a total teardown --- a three year plan --- despite whatever happy talk euphemistic spin Cohen and Stearns come up with. What else would you call it when everybody can be had other than maybe Lindor, Nimmo , Alvarez and Diaz?

According to all of the commentary and media coverage, it seems like a foregone conclusion, a certainty that Pete Alonso will be traded by the trade deadline.

Frayed Knot wrote: =batmagadanleadoff post_id=157590 time=1717383024 user_id=68] I didn't see anybody complaining about Mendoza using four different relievers to get through the four innings comprising innings number five through eight. I was certainly questioning, in real time, the one and out strategy for Garrett on the heels of his perfect inning on 11 pitches and then the same when Ottavino was hooked after his perfect inning on just nine.

Edgy MD wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: If you keep looking for the reliever who might not have it that day you're bound to find one sooner or later. That's a pretty solid principle. It is. Another solid principle is that the reliever who was lights out in the seventh inning can, just the same, stink up the joint in the eighth inning if he's left in the game. Nobody here knows a fraction of what the team knows and anything can happen no matter what. Not that it isn't a lot of fun to second guess after the fact with hindsight. But if this was an exact science, they would've figured out by now how to get nine scoreless innings from the staff every game. But then the other team would've figured out the same stuff and in the end, no team would ever score. I didn't see anybody complaining about Mendoza using four different relievers to get through the four innings comprising innings number five through eight.

I could see this happening in a roundabout sort of way. Maybe it already did happen. For example, Ohtani had no interest in coming here. Because the Mets, relative to the Dodgers (and the Yankees), sucked. And so the Mets weren't gonna win as often. And if the Mets don't win, Obtani ain't gonna get as many pitcher wins as he would with the Dodgers, the thinking goes, all things being equal. That's probably how it went with Yamamoto, too.

Cobb was an old confederate. "Confederate" was singular. Who cares about Cobb's family? Hitler's mother was kind to Jews. What? Cobb wasn't a racist? What the hell does Cobb's family have to do with anything here? And they weren't even MLB players. Pierce wrote "old confederate", not "old confederacy ".

Good ol' Charlie Pierce on the inclusion of Negro League stats into the main body of MLB stats, which I'm a little surprised didn't get its own thread (till just now). My favorite line is the one about federal matching funds. I am a complete agnostic on the ongoing religious war among baseball savants between the old-school types and the modern figure filberts. As long as I can still sit in Fenway on a cool summer evening with a dog and a cold one, even though I now have to apply for federal matching funds to afford it, I couldn't care less what some rookie shortstop's WAR is. Tell me that it's significant in evaluating him and I'll accept it, but you can't make me give a damn. I'm still busy being furious that current management squandered Mookie Betts. Anyway, Major League Baseball did a good thing this week. It allowed the incorporation of the statistics from the Negro Leagues into the formal MLB record book. This has necessitated some adjustments in the historical record. From MLB.com: [***] Oh, how that must stick in the craw of that vicious old Confederate [Ty Cobb]. Gibson also knocked Babe Ruth out of the top spot in career slugging percentage. I hope baseball takes the logical next step and applies an asterisk to every record set between 1883, when Cap Anson threatened to pull his Chicago team out of scheduled games if any Black players were allowed to take the field, and April 15, 1947, when Jackie Robinson took his first swings in a Major League ballpark. Sorry, Hack Wilson. Fair is fair. https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a60966140/republican-senators-white-house-funding/https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a60966140/republican-senators-white-house-funding/

DiComo: Reed Garrett, called upon to finish this one off in the ninth, has his own (temporary) closer's entrance now. The lights flashed off and Kid Rock's "Bawitdaba" is blasting at Citi Field. And to think I liked Reed Garrett. I know whatchoo mean. I think.

No fucking way! 49er Gene was #18. Viking Gene was #84. I know my Gene Washingtons and l'll know this till the day I die. But I appreciate the reference. Never thought I'd hear it during a local Mets broadcast.

Steve Cohen's art collection is valued at about one billion dollars and is considered to be one of the most impressive collections in the whole wide world. https://www.vanityfair.com/style/story/steve-cohen-art-metshttps://www.vanityfair.com/style/story/steve-cohen-art-mets (long read) I knew that Cohen owned one of the original Warhol Marilyns but Cohen also owns Jasper Johns' iconic Flag. [FIMG=444]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6b/Jasper_Johns%27s_%27Flag%27%2C_Encaustic%2C_oil_and_collage_on_fabric_mounted_on_plywood%2C1954-55.jpg[/FIMG]

Frayed Knot wrote: But the run potential going in are different between the two situations so the batter is credited with how much he exceeded, or didn't, the expectation. I get that. And it's accounted for in the 2.6 and 0.3 or 0.4 RE24's in my previous post. A batter has nothing to do with how many runners are on base when he bats. That's all total sheer luck from the batter's perspective. The three run tripler greatly exceeds the run expectation for that situation. The batter who bats with the bases empty couldn't exceed run expectation like the three run tripler did even if he hits the ball 25,000 feet all the way into the next zip code. So two batters do the exact same thing: they each hit two out triples. Yet one batter's RE24 score is almost 10x the other batter's.

The two out three run triple is worth approx. 2.6 in RE24. The two out bases empty triple is worth about 0.3 or 0.4 in RE24. See what I mean?

Frayed Knot wrote: Each will get credited or debited based on the run expectancy in both the bases loaded ABs and the bases empty ABs. The 3B w/bases loaded has a much higher run expectancy and therefore will get credited only with the difference between what he did and the typical amount from that situation. The bases empty 3B also gets a positive score because his team's run expectancy also went up more than what is expected. I edited my last post. Did you respond to the edited or unedited post? OE -- Not that it matters much. I didn't change it substantively. I sinlpy clarifed a point.