batmagadanleadoff

Edgy MD wrote: 1970 [FIMG=144]https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/gTsAAOSwN9dkxdLP/s-l960.webp[/FIMG] [fimg=222]https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/ENAAAOSwsQBkxdLO/s-l960.webp[/FIMG] That closeup also helps us see that it's mostly yearbooks that the autograph hounds are waving in our hero's face. We can also date the photo to then-most-recent 1969 season as we can make out the photo from season's yearbook cover, knowing that, each time Harrelson was handed a new book to sign, he was left to ponder the disembodied heads of three of his teammates. [FIMG=222]https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/ovgAAOSwOAtjrO02/s-l1600.webp[/FIMG] Yes and yes. Of course, the surest foolproof proof that the photo was shot in 1969 is the partial view of the centennial patch on Bud's left sleeve, which was worn in 1969 by all but the Pirates. [FIMG=222]https://patchcollection.com/cdn/shop/products/mlb-100th-anniversary-patch.jpg?v=1585071740&width=1100[/FIMG]

I kinda have the same issue. Kinda. My issue is that I've seen very few new movies over the past 10 years or so. Not only in movie theaters, but even when they play on TV/Cable TV. I just have less patience. This doesn't apply to movies that I've already seen. I could watch those all over again. Also, this doesn't apply to older movies that I've never seen. I'm a big fan of TCM. But I have less patience for newer movies. I don't know exactly why that is.

5.

Might as well. SI's been essentially dead and an embarrassment for years now. Many of its online pieces read like they've been written by, no exaggeration, 10 year olds. What a fall. I guess sports print media and journalism really is dying.

May 11 and 21 1975 - Mets v Reds - Seaver, Torre, Bench, Morgan & Perez. And some other Mets/Reds games under Joe Frazier.

Edgy MD wrote: I'm all for Torre-counting. Me too. He's a HOFer and he played in games. I'd count the games he played in. That's how the question is phrased. So the Seaver/Torre Mets never played the Bench/Morgan/Perez Reds?

Edgy MD wrote: I'm all for Torre-counting. Me too. He's a HOFer and he played in games. I'd count the games he played in. That's how the question is phrased.

=Gwreck post_id=145318 time=1705584094 user_id=56] All answers heretofore correct (with Perez). Answering a question: Seaver and Ryan did appear in some games together (not many) and I did not identify any against a HOF-laden opponent such as the Mays/McCovey/Marichal Giants or the Cepeda/Brock/Gibson Cardinals.

Also, there were five HOFers in the '69 WS: Seaver, Ryan, Palmer and the two Robinsons. But all five never appeared in the same game. You can get to six HOFers if you count the two managers, Weaver and Hodges, although obviously, they didn't play in any WS games. So Seaver and Ryan never appeared in the same Mets game? Because you have no games listed for the period 1966-1971, when they were Mets teammates. Either that, or they did appear together, but the total number of HOFers in that or those games was less than five.

Giants v. Mets - May 16, 1964 -- 6 -- this one's unusual because the Mets had no HOFers on this date. So for this to work out, I'm guessing that both Gaylord Perry and Juan Marichal had to have appeared in this game. Also, Willie Mays, Willie McCovey, Orlando Cepeda and Duke Snider.

Mets v Reds ('72-'73) 5 - Seaver, Mays, Bench, Morgan Perez

5 is Strawberry.

2022 Typewriter Chewing Gum Total Mets set - Code Name: Rum Raisin [FIMG=333]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53670135838_9f819ec6d1_h.jpg[/FIMG]

Some absurd reader comments from The Athletic piece on the Mets retiring Doc and Darryl's uni numbers: William C. 3h 24m ago This is awful that Gary Carter has not been honored yet. Carl C. 3h 25m ago Can someone please explain to me why Doc's and Darryl's numbers are being retired, but still no Kid? The Mets should be ashamed of themselves! https://theathletic.com/5209082/2024/01/17/mets-dwight-gooden-darryl-strawberry-jersey-retirements/https://theathletic.com/5209082/2024/01/17/mets-dwight-gooden-darryl-strawberry-jersey-retirements/

Edgy MD wrote: The photo background doesn't give us much information, but it appears to be a spring facility. Maybe it's early spring, because Bud doesn't have much of a tan at all yet. It might be early Spring, I can't tell, but that's Shea Stadium. That's the Shea scoreboard and the centerfield black background behind Bud. You can also see the Longines clock on the scoreboard and a Rheingold ad panel below the scoreboard. I'm beginning to suspect that the Harrelson pic for his '69 Topps card was shot in 1966. First of all, the '69 set was notorious for using old -- even anachronistic pics -- indeed, many of the photos from the '69 set were already used in prior sets. Second, Harrelson looks extremely young in that shot. He looks more like the rookie he once was or as he appears in the Rock and Roll card above. And finally, the ad that I thought was a Rheingold ad looks more like the Herald Tribune ad that was under the scoreboard in '65 and in '66. And the pic can't be from '65 because of the Mets skyline logo patch on Bud's left sleeve -- in '65, Bud woulda been sportin' a World's Fair patch instead. So 1966.

Edgy MD wrote: The photo background doesn't give us much information, but it appears to be a spring facility. Maybe it's early spring, because Bud doesn't have much of a tan at all yet. It might be early Spring, I can't tell, but that's Shea Stadium. That's the Shea scoreboard and the centerfield black background behind Bud. You can also see the Longines clock on the scoreboard and a Rheingold ad panel below the scoreboard.

So what's happening with 1969? We're waiting. Need a hand? Glad to help out. Because if it's 1969, Bud Harrelson, baseball cards and Americana that youse crave, boy do we have the goods. Holy Harrelson do we have the goods! [FIMG=444]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53467491557_d0c882e6a3_c.jpg[/FIMG]

Edgy MD wrote: Yolmer Sanchez was a 2023 New York Met.... Sanchez was a 2022 Met, not a 2023 Met. [FIMG=388]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53467476652_13000f0614_h.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=277]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53467477892_6c0cbcb33a_h.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=277]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53468704469_b1828d78e9_h.jpg[/FIMG]

5 is catcher.

1 is Larry Bowa. 5 is Timo Perez.

Mets rumored to be in discussions to acquire two-time Cy Young award winner, Blake Snell. https://www.si.com/mlb/mets/news/mets-reportedly-have-held-discussions-with-superstar-could-surprise-signing-be-coming-pat3https://www.si.com/mlb/mets/news/mets-reportedly-have-held-discussions-with-superstar-could-surprise-signing-be-coming-pat3

So where's all of this Americana our main man Bud is gonna take us through? Because I'm already losing my patience with this. I was sure that by now, we'd be shown, or told about the Nehru jackets and paisley ties in Buddy's locker. Or how his shiny light blues portend wood paneled covered living room walls and avocado colored kitchen appliances and accessories. And what do you suppose Jane Jarvis was playing on her organ when that baseball card pic was shot? Purple Haze, maybe? Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band? Or those traditional staples of Jarvis's repertoire -- like The Tarantella or The Mexican Hat Dance --- time honored if not exactly Americana. Or maybe that photo of Bud was shot in 1966 instead of 1967, because Topps. Then ol' Jane might've been playing one of these hits, immortalized in Typewriter Chewing Gum's Rock and Roll Part 2 Starling Marte subset. Because no one does baseball, the Mets and Americana like Typewriter Chewing Gum. [FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53461887346_fc3b2caf3b_h.jpg[/FIMG] [media=youtube]IP8G4clUJBY[/media] [media=youtube]8emBhUD4Znw[/media] [media=youtube]EqDfi7HfxdM[/media]

[FIMG=666]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53460356358_538e1070d9_n.jpg[/FIMG]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: No disrespect to Bud Harrelson, but no way. They might as well retire all of the numbers that have been issued so far, because everyone who wore them will one day be dead. Yes!

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: whoever started the retiring numbers game, it was a slippery slope. The fans want to see it but the truth is the Mets don't have enough number-retirement worthy guys to meet the demand. Granted so far I've seen just one person on a social media platform, but it wouldn't shock me to see a groundswell of support to retire #3 as part of the Buddy memorial tribute on Opening Day, or have the ceremony later in the year. Yes, even though two are still planned for this summer. Right now #3 is unassigned, and the official roster pages have yet to give numbers to the new manager and coaches. So that's one less “hurdle” for Buddy fans to get over to get #3 retired this year! Harrelson's case to have his Mets number retired is like 500 times better than Gary Carter's and every time this topic comes up, I can't believe that Carter's number has been in mothballs for about 20 years now and that so many people think it deserves to be retired. I still can't get over it. It's the most bizarre Mets thing I ever heard. But I tend to go with Lunchbucket. I'm happy for the retirement of Kooz and Keith's numbers but the standard now is much lower than the standard that existed when I was growing up.