batmagadanleadoff

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I bid $20 million a year for the knuckleballer. No. Atsa not enough. $Thirty million a year.

I bid $20 million a year for the knuckleballer.

Thanks. But I don't know if I'm back yet.

Edgy MD wrote: Yahoo's story features a photo with two Mets Hall-of-Famers. Any guesses on who is on the left and right? (Jane Jarvis? Bob Apodaca?) That's Joan Payson next to Eddie K., if it ain't Dr. Frahnkenshteen.

seawolf17 wrote: Nothing unusual here. This is how it should be. Two good baseball teams in a short series are in a crap-shoot. Thus, a team that makes the playoffs (I'm not counting the new one game WC qualifier as playoffs) has, essentially, a one in eight chance of winning the World series, whether it's the team with the best record in baseball or the wild card team with the worst record. That's how I see it. The Bobby Cox Braves get too much disrespect for supposedly not winning more WS', but they won about as many as they ought to have won.

Frayed Knot wrote: I always like to check the newspaper the morning after the Yanx get eliminated just to make sure I wasn't the victim of some elaborate prank. So let's see here ... Yup, it really happened!

For David Wright, the market will bear a lot more than the Mets can By Howard Megdal 4:11 pm Oct. 16, 2012 The Mets might not be in a position to sign David Wright to a long-term extension. Unfortunate, but given the ownership group's ongoing financial problems, that's the way it is. Word leaked last week that the Mets are preparing an offer of six years guaranteed, in the neighborhood of $100 million. In all likelihood, that won't be close to enough. Adam Rubin speculated that Wright would receive around eight years and $160 million on the open market, which seems about right. The Mets may argue, if and when Wright follows Jose Reyes to greener pastures, that they didn't want to commit to Wright for as long as he wanted them to. After all, they need only point to the Yankees as a cautionary tale. Alex Rodriguez, recently benched, is 37 amd declining each year. And he's signed for another five years and $114 million. There are also the endless claims from the Mets that their own failed long-term contracts have prevented them from signing new players, from Oliver Perez and Luis Castillo back in 2010, to Jason Bay and Johan Santana now. But let the record show that if the cash-strapped, debt-plagued Mets let their best, most popular player go, it'll be because they didn't offer to pay him what he's worth. The object in any long-term deal, realistically, is to see the player perform at a level worth more than he'll earn in his peak years, thus making up for it when he likely falls short of his contract's value at the back end of the deal, as he ages. In Wright's case, his 2012 was worth $35.1 million, according to Fangraphs. This wasn't a fluke. Wright's 2008 season was worth $32 million, and his 2007 checked in at $36.2 million. Wright is on track to be one of the greatest third basemen ever, and that was true prior to his rebound 2012 season. Were Wright to be worth $30 million in 2014 and 2015 alone, he'd need to be worth approximately around $16 million on average over the remainder of his contract, a level he's reached in every full season he's played, with the exception of his injury-marred 2011. So it's fairly easy to see Wright rewarding a team for signing him for this high price, which means that the 6/100 level is actually likely to be well shy of what he'd get in an open market. It also probably underrates what he'll be worth in another way. Major League Baseball just signed new television contracts that will pay every team approximately $50 million more in revenue, starting in 2014. Coincidentally, if Wright plays out his option and heads to free agency, he'll be hitting the market just as every single team will have vastly more to spend over the next eight seasons, the length of the new television deals. It is hard to imagine this won't directly affect the price of premier free agents. And David Wright is almost certainly going to be the best one out there. It's just a shame that even if the Mets make their best offer, it's probably going to be one Wright has no business settling for. http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2012/10/6538150/david-wright-market-will-bear-lot-more-mets-can

Game 6 Peter Gammons (from Sports Illustrated's 1987 baseball preview issue) excerpts: Clemens, finally recovered from the flu that had so weakened him in the playoffs and the second game of the Series, struck out six Mets the first time through the order and had retired eight straight entering the fifth. Neither Clemens nor any succeeding Boston pitcher noticed the big woman in red behind home plate who was trying to distract him by continually rolling her arms, much like one of Gladys Knight's Pips. Whoever she was, she was persistent, because she kept it up until the baseball went through Buckner's legs. Greenwell struck out, and Johnson had McDowell walk Boggs intentionally. But then McDowell also walked Barrett to load the bases. Johnson had little choice but to bring in Orosco, who would retire 16 of the 18 batters he faced in the Series and should have been the MVP instead of Knight. Here is where Johnson committed his primary strategical boo-boo. The pitcher was scheduled to lead off the bottom of the inning, so with his best reliever in the game and the Red Sox one inning away from a world championship, Johnson should have made a double switch in order to keep Orosco in the game for at least the ninth inning. He could have put Lee Mazzilli or Mitchell in left and put Orosco in Wilson's spot, thus letting the new leftfielder lead off the bottom of the eighth. "Davey forgot," says one manager. "This wasn't one of my better games," Johnson admitted later. It's far too easy to criticize managers, and very often the critics can't see the forest for the trees. While Johnson can sometimes be an unorthodox strategist, he is usually borne out in the long run by his players' performances. But in this case, he did forget. An inning later he would compound the situation by double-switching Strawberry out of the game, which led to Strawberry's pouting, which led to Strawberry's hotdogging it around the bases in Game 7 to show his manager up, which led to Nipper�who gave up the home run�hitting Strawberry in the back in spring training. Carter drilled a 2-1 fastball into left field. Next up, Mitchell. When Hernandez was at the plate, Mitchell was up in the clubhouse; he had taken his uniform pants off and was on the phone making a reservation for his flight home to San Diego. "I didn't think I'd be hitting," he told Dave Anderson of The New York Times this spring. "I hadn't hit against a righthanded pitcher all season in that situation. Heep was still on the bench. I figured he'd hit for me, so I went up to the clubhouse." That shows how closely some players follow the game, because Heep had pinch-hit for Santana in the fifth�and was out of the game. When Johnson read Mitchell's quote, he said, "Now I'm even happier about the deal [for Kevin McReynolds]." Howard Johnson came running into the clubhouse. "Get out there, you're hitting," he hollered at Mitchell. "I hung up the phone, then I slipped my pants back on," said Mitchell, "but I'd taken off everything under them. My jock, my underwear." Mitchell wasn't totally disconcerted. He remembered that when he and Schiraldi had played together in Jackson, Miss., in 1983, the pitcher had told him that if he ever faced him, he would start him out with a fastball inside, then try to get him with a slider away. That's exactly what Schiraldi did, and Mitchell hit the slider for a single to center. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1065818/1/index.htm

Game 6 Peter Gammons (from Sports Illustrated's 1987 baseball preview issue) excerpts: Clemens, finally recovered from the flu that had so weakened him in the playoffs and the second game of the Series, struck out six Mets the first time through the order and had retired eight straight entering the fifth. Neither Clemens nor any succeeding Boston pitcher noticed the big woman in red behind home plate who was trying to distract him by continually rolling her arms, much like one of Gladys Knight's Pips. Whoever she was, she was persistent, because she kept it up until the baseball went through Buckner's legs. Greenwell struck out, and Johnson had McDowell walk Boggs intentionally. But then McDowell also walked Barrett to load the bases. Johnson had little choice but to bring in Orosco, who would retire 16 of the 18 batters he faced in the Series and should have been the MVP instead of Knight. Here is where Johnson committed his primary strategical boo-boo. The pitcher was scheduled to lead off the bottom of the inning, so with his best reliever in the game and the Red Sox one inning away from a world championship, Johnson should have made a double switch in order to keep Orosco in the game for at least the ninth inning. He could have put Lee Mazzilli or Mitchell in left and put Orosco in Wilson's spot, thus letting the new leftfielder lead off the bottom of the eighth. "Davey forgot," says one manager. "This wasn't one of my better games," Johnson admitted later. It's far too easy to criticize managers, and very often the critics can't see the forest for the trees. While Johnson can sometimes be an unorthodox strategist, he is usually borne out in the long run by his players' performances. But in this case, he did forget. An inning later he would compound the situation by double-switching Strawberry out of the game, which led to Strawberry's pouting, which led to Strawberry's hotdogging it around the bases in Game 7 to show his manager up, which led to Nipper�who gave up the home run�hitting Strawberry in the back in spring training. Carter drilled a 2-1 fastball into left field. Next up, Mitchell. When Hernandez was at the plate, Mitchell was up in the clubhouse; he had taken his uniform pants off and was on the phone making a reservation for his flight home to San Diego. "I didn't think I'd be hitting," he told Dave Anderson of The New York Times this spring. "I hadn't hit against a righthanded pitcher all season in that situation. Heep was still on the bench. I figured he'd hit for me, so I went up to the clubhouse." That shows how closely some players follow the game, because Heep had pinch-hit for Santana in the fifth�and was out of the game. When Johnson read Mitchell's quote, he said, "Now I'm even happier about the deal [for Kevin McReynolds]." Howard Johnson came running into the clubhouse. "Get out there, you're hitting," he hollered at Mitchell. "I hung up the phone, then I slipped my pants back on," said Mitchell, "but I'd taken off everything under them. My jock, my underwear." Mitchell wasn't totally disconcerted. He remembered that when he and Schiraldi had played together in Jackson, Miss., in 1983, the pitcher had told him that if he ever faced him, he would start him out with a fastball inside, then try to get him with a slider away. That's exactly what Schiraldi did, and Mitchell hit the slider for a single to center. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1065818/1/index.htm

G-Fafif wrote: The day has long since passed when a waitress could afford behind-home-plate seats. RIP to a woman and an era. One has absolutely no idea of the lady's personal life or what her financial situation was; for all we know, she was independently wealthy and waitressed for the love of the people she saw every day or night. But, barring that unlikely scenario, I was thinking the same thing. I was fortunate to sit in Bo's row for many, many Mets games. Occasionally, Bo would be in attendance, and for a few games, I slid over the few empty seats between us --when they were unoccupied -- and sat right next to her. She was a character, and I say that endearingly. I don't know what Bo's financial situation was, but I know that many of the season ticket holders that sat in the section at Shea on the field level directly behind home plate were of ordinary financial means. They ended up in the choicest seats at Shea because they were the longest tenured season ticket holders and over the years, eventually landed behind the plate based on their seniority. Some of them were original 1962 Polo Grounds season ticket holders. Back then, there were relatively few season ticket holders and ticket prices, even for the best seats, adjusted for inflation, were affordable and accessible to the masses. The season ticket holders of ordinary financial means began to get priced out beginning in the early '90's when ticket prices rose astronomically. In fact, it's likely that in the decade of the '90's, Met ticket prices rose more than those of any other team. But unwilling to part with their prime time tickets, many of those season ticket holders resorted to selling large blocks of their tickets while keeping for themsleves, a small number of games. This was the only way many of those ticket holders could afford to keep their season ticket accounts in their own names. I suspect that those ticket holders are a thing of the past and that they did not make the move to Citi Field. Or if they did, they not retain the Citi Field seating equivalent of Shea's under the netting section.

Go Cards Go! Because I think that Selig and the baseball heads are rooting against the Wild Card teams. And if Selig's against the Cards, I'm all for them.

Texas Rangers 2012 season tickets commemorate team's 40th anniversary. Here's a few:

NY Mets may start talks with third baseman David Wright as early as next week, according to sources In the final days of the season, Alderson vowed an aggressive push to re-sign the two �core players� as quickly as possible. By Andy Martino / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Saturday, October 13, 2012, 12:37 AM WASHINGTON � Mets officials and the agents for David Wright have not yet scheduled a meeting or begun formal contract negotiations, but could do so next week, according to people involved in the process. There have not yet been substantive talks between the team and R.A. Dickey�s representatives either � although in both cases, general manager Sandy Alderson engaged the veterans in informal discussions before the season ended. In the final days of the season, Alderson vowed an aggressive push to re-sign the two �core players� as quickly as possible. Given the fact that talks have not yet begun, is it still possible that either player could be signed this month? �Too early to tell,� one Mets source said. Both Wright and Dickey have one year left on their contracts in the form of club options for 2013, but the Mets are seeking big-picture resolution on both this fall. Alderson has made clear that, whatever the potential risks of a offering a long-term contract to a player � Wright � who will turn 30 next season, he is interested in committing the years and dollars necessary to retain the third baseman, who could command a contract of six or seven years and $120 million or more. There appears to be more internal debate about Dickey, although Alderson is said by associates to be sincere in his view of the 37-year-old Cy Young candidate as worthy of another multiyear deal. In some corners of the organization, there is concern about the knuckleballer�s age, and the injuries that he was able to pitch through during the past two seasons. Contract talks broke down last season, and if that happens again, Dickey could be shopped to other teams. But Alderson has already launched his pitch to Wright and Dickey, in conversations that took place in September. Presenting an honest assessment of the team�s ability to contend next year (in summary: Anything can happen, but it will probably take another year before the Mets can finish .500 or better), the GM has assured the players that he expects greater financial flexibility before the 2014 season, and believes that the organization�s young pitchers will be developed by that time. Next step: Engaging Seth and Sam Levinson, Wright�s agents, and Bo McKinnis, who represents Dickey, in informal negotiations. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/wright-time-mets-david-article-1.1182522

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I'm not so sure he's worth $20 million, but maybe I'm not aware of who all the other $20 million players are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest_paid_Major_League_Baseball_players If Jason Bay can get $18M, Wright should get $20M just for breathing.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm not so sure he's worth $20 million, but maybe I'm not aware of who all the other $20 million players are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest_paid_Major_League_Baseball_players

Put down the MFY's for inclusion in the Fall of 2013 David Wright sweepstakes.

Some more perspective: 7@125 is about what Wright earns now. I'm skeptical. He's worth $20M a year.

excerpt: Wright is believed to be seeking a contract valued at at least $125 million over seven years. He hit .306/.391/.492 with 21 home runs and 15 stolen bases in 670 plate appearances this season while being selected to the All-Star team for the sixth time. http://www.cbssports.com/general/blog/mlb-rumors/20480106/report-mets-could-have-new-deals-for-david-wright-and-ra-dickey-by-world-series If this report is true, then the Mets supposed offer of 6/$100M wouldn't be much off the mark, at least as far as matching Wright's idea of how much money he seeks to average yearly. But that seventh year ......

Nice O'Day piece in the NYT. excerpt: Early in the 2009 season, the Mets had a young side-winding reliever that, to them at least, seemed expendable. They needed a starting pitcher. So they put Darren O�Day on waivers and called up Nelson Figueroa. What the Mets apparently did not see � or what O�Day did not show at the time � was in clear view on Thursday, in extra innings of an elimination game, as his looping breaking balls and darting fastballs cut through the heart of the Yankees� order. Indeed, after his two and two-thirds scoreless innings in Thursday�s 2-1 win, Baltimore could make the case that O�Day has been their most valuable player of the postseason. He has not allowed a run in seven innings, with only one hit and one walk allowed in five games. �Those hitters are just as amped up as the pitchers are,� O�Day said. �If you can control yourself, you have the advantage. You have to go out there and pitch like you�re throwing a bullpen.� read the rest at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/sports/baseball/darren-oday-shows-value-on-mound-for-orioles.html?_r=0

...according to Howie Megdal The Mets may be in decline but their ticket prices aren't By Howard Megdal 3:40 pm Oct. 11, 2012 The Mets are coming off a 74-88 season, their sixth straight without a playoff appearance and third straight in which their record was worse than the previous year's. The team cut more than $50 million from the 2011 payroll for 2012, and announced that they will be keeping payroll static for 2013. Attendance dropped from 3.16 million in 2009 to 2.56 million in 2010, 2.35 million in 2011 and 2.24 million in 2012. This happened despite steep cuts in ticket prices in each season, along with extensive deals and giveaways just to sell out 2012's Opening Day and keep the 2012 fan drain to a minimum. So in 2013, the Mets are trying something different: ticket prices are going up. The released prices for 2013 season tickets are out, and no seats will be available for less money than in 2012. However, the prices of a significant number of tickets will go up more than seven percent, from the least expensive seat in Citi Field, Promenade Reserved, to a large number of the field level seats. The Mets declined to provide any 2012 ticket pricing, despite repeated requests. But their prices are still available online, and an apples-to-apples comparison is possible. The following sections will increase in price-per-seat: Field Silver ($6,386 to $6,577), Baseline Gold ($6,433 to $6,581), Baseline Silver ($3,629 to $3,713), Left Field Gold ($4,164 to $4,460), Right Field Gold ($4,164 to $4,285), Left Field/Right Field Reserved ($2,341 to $2,425), Caesars Gold ($5,767 to $5,931), Caesars Box ($3,356 to $3,423), Pepsi Porch ($2,200 to $2,342), Promenade Gold ($2,808 to $2915), Promenade Box and Promenade Infield ($1,776 to $1,833) and Promenade Reserved ($1,389 to $1,491). All other sections will remain the same price, with those sections primarily the most expensive seats in the stadium. For some perspective, the nine highest price points for season tickets will remain the same. And the bottom eleven price points for season tickets are going up. Absent an increase in payroll for new players or decrease in prices to entice bargain shoppers, the Mets appear to be relying on the promise of a chance to buy All-Star Game tickets as a spur to new attendance. They could be on to something there, although the precedent is mixed, in terms of how significant that something will be. The Kansas City Royals, who hosted the 2012 All-Star Game, saw attendance rise just 15,409 for the season over 2011, or a difference of 190 per game. The Arizona Diamondbacks not only hosted the 2011 All-Star Game, they did so while the team improved from 65 wins to 94. Their attendance went up just 48,735 from 2010 to 2011, or roughly 600 per game. And the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, who hosted the 2010 All-Star Game, saw attendance inch up a total of 10,428 fans all season over 2009, or roughly 129 fans per game. http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2012/10/6538123/mets-may-be-decline-their-ticket-prices-arent?sports-bucket-headline

Two Separate Questions Posted by: Howard Megdal - Posted in Business of Baseball, Today's Mets headlines on Oct 11, 2012 Briefly, on a couple of questions that some discussions on Twitter seem to conflate regarding David Wright. 1. What will it take to sign David Wright? 2. What should the Mets offer David Wright? What we know so far is that the Mets say they plan to offer Wright a six-year deal in the neighborhood of $100 million. Now, considering Joey Votto�s ten-year, $225 million extension (in terms of player value, a far more similar comp than Ryan Zimmerman), the lack of other third basemen available, and the onrushing TV money about to hit the sport in 2014, paying Wright exactly what he�ll make in 2013 for only another six years doesn�t sound like close to enough. Jayson Werth, just two years ago, got 7/$126 million. Carl Crawford got 7/$142 million. So in terms of question number one, though anything is possible, it seems very unlikely that David Wright�s agents think he is getting any less than 8/$160 million, and with good reason. Will he settle for far less than that? It is possible. Just seems awfully unlikely. But conflating that with question two is a mistake. There�s a very different conversation to be had, namely: should the Mets pay David Wright $20 million per year, beginning with his age 31 season, and ending with his age 38 season? Is that a good use of funds? In general, teams need to pay for premium production, with the contract evening out by teams overpaying on the back end. And really, it is an impossible question to answer without knowing, at least to some degree, if/when the Mets can ever spend money again in a competitive way. $20 million in a $90 million payroll is vastly different than $20 million in a $140 or $170 million payroll. But in terms of answering question one, I don�t think there�s much dispute that the Mets are far short right now of what it will take, an odd thing to see after the urgency of the sign David Wright message being put out by the team. And if the team has determined the answer to question two is well shy of the answer to question one, the urgency to conduct negotiations is happening for a different reason: public consumption, ahead of a trade. I�m sure the Mets would be thrilled to keep David Wright if he is willing to return for well below his market value. And there�s no shame in being rightly hesitant to pay him above his market value, especially given the team�s financial reality right now. But let�s remember that both questions are in play here. http://mets.lohudblogs.com/2012/10/11/two-separate-questions/

It's all so obvious. In hindsight. Tough, but fair, quiz.

Swan Swan H wrote: Once again, Megdal writes as though this offer is on the table when it is still speculation. Also, he chooses not to quote Heyman's note that the Mets will be trying hard to sign Wright. I'm fine with Megdal basing his piece on the $100M figure. That's the figure that was publicized. But yeah, he should've made it clear that there's no public information indicating that the money was actually offered to Wright.

Do The Sixth Sense and Boyz N' The Hood get docked points for their filmmakers' subsequent slouch into creative crapulence? Same question goes for Malcolm X. No flicks from '90's legendary everyman Tom Hanks either. I'da included Saving Private Ryan, sappy present tense bookend opening and ending scenes notwithstanding. I recall Casino being omitted from many critics' best of the 90's list ten or so years ago -- deemed noteworthy, but duplicative: a Goodfellas West, if you will.