batmagadanleadoff

If you haven't already, I'd recommend you read Ryczek's book on the '60's Mets. I think it's one of the best books ever written about Mets history. I purchased the book specifically to read about the Wes Westrum years, which are the least documented years of the Mets first decade. To the extent that those years are ever covered, they're treated lightly -- and typically, only as a way to gauge the oncoming miracle of a few years later -- rarely for their own merits (or lack). Most Mets books that covered the '60's couldn't wait to get through this Westrum period where the cutesy lovableness was wearing off of the team while the talent level remained somewhat grim, if embryonic. I had little expectations from this book. Throneberry's bungled triple, for example, an otherwise fantastic story, loses its' effect somewhere on the way to its' fifteenth telling. But Ryczek didn't simply rehash what you and I already know. He sought out many ex-Mets and conducted fresh interviews, and backed his field work with diligent research -- it's a hunch, but I'm under the impression that Ryczek read the newspaper accounts of every single game the Mets ever played in the '60s to prepare for this book.

The 250 club 1. Frank Taveras (JCL) ______________ The 250 Club. Not. 1. Junior Ortiz (JCL)

A flashback to perhaps, the last time the Mets and Pirates were simultaneously relevant: Baseball; A Rooky Lefty Helps Pirates Sweep the Mets By JOSEPH DURSO, Special to The New York Times Published: September 7, 1990 PITTSBURGH, Sept. 6� Valera Falters Early Tomlin far outlasted Julio Valera, the 21-year-old rookie selected by the Mets to pitch them into the homestretch of the pennant race while established stars like Ron Darling watched from the bullpen. But Valera, making his second start in a week, was knocked out in the third inning and the Mets did not survive. ''You don't score runs, it doesn't matter,'' said Bud Harrelson, the manager of the Mets. ''I still think we can win. What can I do now? Pray a lot more, I guess.'' ''We did the best we could,'' said Howard Johnson. ''It's not the end of the world. There's still time.'' But the Mets were clearly shocked at the turn of events this week. Tim Teufel put it this way: ''Our fundamentals broke down. We didn't hang in there. We saw our offense at its lowest point, and that flowed over into other parts of our game.'' Succession of Troubles For the Mets, this was what Harrelson calls ''reality,'' life in the thick of a pennant race with high stakes and low results. And the reality of the situation was that Harrelson's Mets were reeling from one disaster to another while time was running out. The Pirates pounced on Valera tonight from the start, rocked him with two runs in the first inning and three in the third, and ended his second game in the big leagues after 57 pitches. The Mets, meanwhile, were watching or waving at a full repertory of breaking balls, sizzling fastballs and offspeed pitches slung at them by Tomlin with a sweeping sidearm delivery that seemed to come from somewhere out near first base. For four innings, the Mets didn't even get a hit. Four of them even struck out, including honchos like Darryl Strawberry, Johnson and Teufel. They seemed as powerless against the rookie left-hander as they had been in their three previous losses against established left-handers. ''I don't know what it is,'' Miller said. ''When we see a left-hander, it's not that we think: ''Oh, no, not another one of those.' That's the weird thing about it.'' Weird or not, the Mets were muzzled one more time by one more left-hander while the Pirates pounced on the right-handed Valera. Pirates Attack Quickly Wally Backman opened the home half of the first by hitting a high chop near second base, and he beat it out for a single when Tommy Herr's hurried throw pulled Teufel off the bag. Jay Bell drew a walk, and the omens were there. Next came Andy Van Slyke, who pulled a sharp grounder to the right side that Herr bobbled for an error, and now the Mets' rookie was surrounded by the ultimate problem: bases loaded, nobody out, Bobby Bonilla and Barry Bonds swinging bats. He coped with the danger nobly for a moment when Bonilla grounded into a double play. But one run crossed, and another quickly followed when Bonds singled deep to the left side of the diving backhand of Johnson. Valera kept peace for one more inning, but in the third he faced five batters, got none of them out and was gone. Van Slyke led the charge with a double to left-center. Bonilla doubled down the left-field line, and the toll rose to 3-0. Bonds was safe in a photo finish on a grounder wide of first base. Sid Bream lined a single to right for another run. Jeff King drilled a single to left for yet another. And Harrelson walked slowly to the mound to rescue his rookie pitcher. http://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/07/sports/baseball-a-rooky-lefty-helps-pirates-sweep-the-mets.html?scp=1&sq=mets+valera+pirates&st=nyt Harrelson: His Own Man? By JOE SEXTON Published: March 11, 1991 PORT ST. LUCIE, Fla.� BUD HARRELSON does not appear alone in the photograph on the cover of the team's 1991 information guide, although he is not joined by any current member of the Mets or their front office. Instead, he is accompanied, basically, by a ghost, for it is a faded, grainy reproduction of the late Gil Hodges's profile that is peering over Harrelson's left shoulder. It is an odd, if not an outright strange, touch. Harrelson, as well, does not have the only locker in his office here at the team's spring training complex. Doc Edwards, the dugout coach, has a stall right next to Harrelson's, and he can often be found alone in the office, smoking a cigarette and reading the newspaper. It is a peculiar, if not entirely inexplicable, arrangement. "Some people don't like to eat alone," said one longtime and respected regular for the Mets. "Maybe Buddy doesn't like to manage alone." The wisecrack, of course, could be interpreted as a cheap shot. And the presence of Hodges in the photograph and Edwards in the office could amount to nothing substantially more than a self-deprecating style on Harrelson's part. But the crack actually has its origins in a longstanding and widespread clubhouse curiosity, one that for more than a couple of players has deepened into an open cynicism about Harrelson's independence as a baseball thinker and field manager. As a result, one of the spring's dominant and explosive questions for the Mets is this: Is Bud Harrelson his own man? It is a question asked by players, speculated about by those outside the team and dismissed disdainfully by Harrelson himself. "It's important for him to have a grip on the clubhouse," said Ron Darling, the pitcher with more years of service with the team than any other current player on the Mets. "But that has to be nurtured." Harrelson's grip appears at best partial as he begins his first full season directing the Mets, a contingent famous in recent years for its underachievement on the field and bellyaching in the locker room and newspapers. There are corners of the clubhouse suspicious of Harrelson's tactical soundness as a manager, convinced that he lacks all genius for the unorthodox or improvisational, as well as the kind of outsized personality that could by force of ego lift a team to exceptional levels of performance. This perspective, at its most savagely sarcastic, portrays Harrelson as an acquiescent tool of the front office. To this contingent, Harrelson's recent rethinking of the lineup he had spent the off season devising amounted to a retreat from his first major strategic decision of the spring. There are, however, numerous players nearly defiant in their support of Harrelson. They consider him immensely dedicated and sufficiently communicative, as well as absolutely entitled to a full year to craft his personal stamp and then apply it. To this collection, Harrelson's willingness to consider adapting his lineup according to the preferencess of individual players reflect his skills as a diplomat and open-minded manager. "You're always going to have second-guessers, and you are always going to have guys who will say good things regardless," said Howard Johnson, the Mets' shortstop, who has returned Harrelson's reliance on him with a public faith in his manager. "I consider him a players' manager. And any players griping or questioning him behind his back should spend more time worrying about themselves." Harrelson's own position is that he hasn't himself spent many minutes agonizing over the perceptions and politics of his clubhouse. He was skeptical of a reporter's claims as to the scope and seriousness of the doubts concerning him. And he pointed to the effort and enthusiasm of the spring training workouts to date as evidence that whatever grousing did exist was irrelevant to the product he was going to produce come April. "I'm an organization man," Harrelson said while overseeing infield drills one day last week. "I think that's a strength. What I see more than anything else this spring are guys going the extra mile. I don't remember it being that way." There are players, though, who can't forget the way it was last season, and the most bothersome images are of Harrelson, who had just one complete year of minor-league managing before taking over last May, repeatedly turning to Edwards, who had managed Cleveland for almost two seasons, in the course of a game for advice and direction, provoking doubts among some players about who was making the critical decisions. Those questions have manifested themselves most sinisterly in Barry Lyons's angry understanding of the roots of his demise with the Mets. Lyons, who began last season as the No. 1 catcher for the Mets before injuring his back and then being sent to the minors for good, said in an emotional and profane outburst here Friday that he believed Edwards was behind his demotion and then departure to the Dodgers. When asked about accusations from various Mets that Edwards's input was far too great to be too healthy, Lyons said bluntly, "I've heard that." Harrelson will hear none of it. He argued with animation but not anger that he relied quite significantly on his entire coaching staff for information, experience and advice, and that he considered that both proper and intelligent. "What am I supposed to be, the expert on every single category?" Harrelson asked. "Of course, I'm going to make all the final decisions, but I have people to remind me of things. I doubt that I'm getting too much advice. All managers lean on their people. Otherwise, what are they there for? To be figureheads?" A figurehead of sorts, though, is what certain Mets firmly believe Harrelson is, his appointment of a piece with the front office's self-styled cleaning out of the clubhouse. Davey Johnson is gone, Darryl Strawberry is gone, Bob Ojeda is gone and Kevin Elster is poised for an exit. "I don't put any stock in that," Frank Cashen, the general manager of the Mets, said of the theory that he had installed Harrelson to have easier access to the manager and more direct control of the team. "His appointment wasn't to satisfy any organization or individual aims. It was to win. This year will be more of an example of what Bud Harrelson is. He's going to be his own man." But what kind of manager is that? Harrelson last season was a strategically conventional manager, one all but doctrinaire in his allegiance to "the book" and "the numbers." It led to debatable pitching changes, difficult to fathom pinch-hit assignments and a confusion in the clubhouse that bordered on the anarchic. The September promotion of Julio Valera, a prospect who endured a nightmarish start in a pivotal contest against the Pirates, was seen by many Mets as either a huge tactical blunder by Harrelson or an example of his willingness to obediently accede to the desires of management. Harrelson's record of 71-49 after taking over for the dismissed Johnson profited from the rampage the Mets went on in June and early July, a binge of 27 triumphs in 33 games. Apart from that sequence, the Mets were only 44-43 under Harrelson. Interestingly, or maybe tellingly, the Mets from the All-Star Game break on were 14-25 in games decided by one or two runs. "My style is more basic than anything else," Harrelson said. "I'm not Whitey Herzog. I'm not Tommy Lasorda. I'm not Davey Johnson. But I've been around the game long enough to understand that the game is mostly made up of standard situations, some creative additions and pure guts. And I think your guts get better the more you manage. And the public acceptance of those guts gets better." Harrelson is at once a persuasively personable and acutely defensive personality, his relations with New York reporters characterized by a polite, but frequently strained neutrality. He perpetually answers questions by turning them around on reporters, and is prone to sizing up issues and people as either "positive" or "negative." "The game, the manager's job, it will harden you," Darling said. "I think Buddy has become harder. There is so much pressure for the manager to be right all the time that they begin to believe they are." Harrelson certainly is convinced that there was a lot wrong with the Mets of recent seasons. He said he had been aghast at the sorry state of the team's fundamentals and left red-faced by its behavior off the field. He said it would change, and that he would not bother to be tender about the transformation process. There is already talk among the players of Harrelson electronically locking off the televisions in the Shea Stadium clubhouse at the start of games and altering the menu of food available to the players. "It's my privilege to change things," Harrelson said. "We did a lot of things that weren't classy, that weren't professional, attitudes off the field that I was embarrassed by. "As for on the field, we faced ball clubs all the time that were not as talented as us, but more sound, and that ended up kicking the stuffing out of us. How about us for once kicking some rearends because we do everything right?" Harrelson said he was braced for the size of the task and the potential resistance both open and clandestine he stands to be hit with. "There were a couple of weeks there last year that got tough," Harrelson said. "I found it consuming, and I got tired. I was a vegetable a lot with my brain. I got haggard. "But I'm going to be a lot less sensitive than I was last year. I felt the repercussions in the clubhouse, and it bothered me. I won't let it this year. All I can do is ask my players to give me 100 percent, for that's what I'm giving them. If we win, we will have won as a team. If we screw up, I'm going to get my rearend fired." http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/11/sports/harrelson-his-own-man.html?scp=4&sq=mets+valera+pirates&st=nyt

Ever the pitch man: The most celebrated and sought after baseball card: Audacious uniforms that spoke to their time and place better, perhaps, than any other uniform in the history of baseball. Freaky Cool classics. Loud and brash. For a loud decade and a brash team BadAss. Bad Asshole. SuperBad Asshole Cover photography by someone you might know I read this book in elementary school. Clemente tripled for the Pirates only hit in the first Mets game I ever attended. Me and the Mets and the Pirates and Memorial Day go way back. In 1976, I saw the Pirates play two at Shea on Memorial Day. I saw Ron Hodges hit a homer. Anybody else ever see that, live? On TV? Anywhere? That same year, I picked up a copy of this 1976 Pirates yearbook, which is in one of my many boxes of baseball stuff. When I was younger, a family friend would occasionally invite me to a baseball game along with his family, knowing what a big baseball fan I was. I always accepted his invitation even though they were Yankee fans and my fanaticism for the sport didn't exactly transfer over to the team in the Bronx. For me, the highlight of those visits to Yankee Stadium was a trip to a baseball souvenir store nearby that sold the yearbooks of every other MLB team, an astonishing treasure trove of a find in the pre-internet 1970's. I'd pick up a yearbook at each of those games. Maybe one of our forum photographers can tell us how SI shot this pic? Here's what I'm currently reading in 2011. It's tedious and bloated and I can't wait to finish the damn thing already only because I'm closer to the end than to the beginning. The cover features a classic photo of the 1960 World Series from a unique vantage Which logo do you prefer? Modern fierce or vintage friendly? You shoulda seen what his wife was wearing. The best stadium in MLB, according to many: Sadly, Willie Stargell passed away the day before PNC's inaugural opening day: Scenes from The Odd Couple motion picture were shot at Shea Stadium during a Mets/Pirates game. What's with the mask, Dave? Who did that to your face? Linked forever: One day, I'm gonna have me one of these: Trivia: Who are the only MLB players to appear in at least 250 games for both the Mets and the Pirates?

Here are your franchise hits leaders, not including pre-1962 stats. Four of the top seven players on this list accumulated 3,000+ hits for an expansion team. 1. Pete Rose � Reds � 3,358 2. Carl Yastrzemski � Red Sox � 3,264 (3,419 total Red Sox hits) 3. Cal Ripken, Jr. � Orioles � 3,184 4. George Brett � Royals � 3,154 5. Robin Yount � Brewers � 3,142 6. Tony Gwynn � Padres � 3,141 7. Craig Biggio � Astros � 3,060 8. Derek Jeter � Yankees � 2,980 9. Lou Brock � Cardinals � 2,713 (Brock 2nd all-time Cards hit ldr., Musial � 3,630 hits #1) 10. Chipper Jones � Braves � 2,536 (Jones 2nd all-time Braves hit ldr.,Aaron - 3,600 hits #1) 11. Ryne Sandberg � Cubs � 2,384 (Sandberg 4th all time Cubs hit ldr., Anson/Banks/Williams) 12. Lou Whitaker � Tigers � 2,369 (Whitaker 6th all time Tigers hit ldr., Cobb � 3,900 hits #1) 13. Garret Anderson � Angels � 2,368 14. Kirby Puckett � Twins � 2,304 (Puckett 2d all-time Senators/Twins hits; Sam Rice 2,889 hits #1) 15. Ichiro Suzuki � Mariners � 2,303 16. Todd Helton � Rockies � 2,280 17. Mike Schmidt � Phillies � 2,234 18. Willie Stargell - Pirates � 2,232 (Stargell, 7th all time Pirates hit ldr., Clemente � 3,000 hits #1) 19. Frank Thomas � White Sox � 2,136 (Thomas 3rd all time Sox hit ldr., Appling/Fox) 20. Willie Davis � Dodgers � 1,977 (2,091 total Dodger hits; 3rd all time; Zack Wheat 2,804 hits #1) 21. Barry Bonds � Giants � 1,951(Bonds, 5th all time Giants hit ldr., Mays � 3,187 hits #1) 22. Michael Young � Rangers � 1,915 23. Bert Campaneris � A�s � 1,882 24. Tim Wallach � Expos/Nationals � 1,694 25. Omar Vizquel � Indians � 1,616 (Vizquel, 7th all time Indians hit ldr., Lajoie � 2,046 hits #1) 26. Tony Fernandez � Blue Jays � 1,583 27. Carl Crawford � Devil Rays/Rays � 1,480 28. Ed Kranepool � Mets - 1,418 29. Luis Gonzalez � Diamondbacks � 1,337 30. Luis Castillo � Marlins � 1,273

G-Fafif wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Harris � 3B Turner � 2B Beltran � RF Murphy � 1B Pagan � CF Thole � C Pridie � LF Tejada � SS Gee � RHP Not exactly the starting nine we envisioned during ST, huh? Actually, kinda looks like a spring training lineup. A spring training road lineup. Get used to it. It's a close replica of the future lineup -- give or take Bay for Beltran.

Del Ennis would object.

I'll flip the rest of the cards over because I'm not gonna be around tomorrow. 1. George Brett - Royals - 137 2. Willie Wilson - Royals - 133 3. Robin Yount - Brewers - 126 4. Lou Brock - Cards - 121 5. Pete Rose - Reds - 115 6. Roberto Clemente - Pirates - 108 7. Carl Crawford - Devil Rays/Rays - 105 8. Willie Davis - Dodgers - 103 9. Jimmy Rollins - Phillies - 99 10. Jose Reyes - Mets - 91 11. Rod Carew - Twins - 90 And for your reading and viewing pleasure, here are your all-time HR leaders for each franchise, not including pre-1962 stats: 1. Barry Bonds - Giants - 586 (Willie Mays, 646 HR's, all-time franchise leader) 2. Mike Schmidt � Phillies - 548 3. Sammy Sosa � Cubs - 545 4. Hank Aaron - Braves - 480 (733 total Braves HR's) 5. Willie Stargell � Pirates - 475 6. Jeff Bagwell � Astros - 449 7. Frank Thomas - White Sox - 448 8. Carl Yastrzemski - Red Sox - 441 (452 total Red Sox HR's; Ted Williams, 521 HR's, all-time franchise leader) 9. Cal Ripken - Orioles - 431 10. Harmon Killebrew - Twins - 429 (559 total Senators/Twins HR's) 11. Ken Griffey, Jr. � Mariners - 417 12. Albert Pujols � Cards - 416 (All-time franchise leader, Stan Musial, 475 HR's) 13. Johnny Bench - Reds - 389 14. Juan Gonzalez � Rangers - 372 15. Mark McGwire � A�s - 363 16. Todd Helton � Rockies - 339 17. Carlos Delgado � Blue Jays - 336 18. Jim Thome � Indians - 334 19. George Brett � Royals - 317 20. Norm Cash � Tigers - 314 (373 total Tigers HR's; Al Kaline, 399 HR's, all-time franchise leader) 21. Tim Salmon - Angels - 299 22. Bernie Williams � Yankees - 287 (Babe Ruth, 659, yada, yada, yada) 23. Eric Karros � Dodgers - 270 (Duke Snider, 389 HR's, all-time franchise leader) 24. Darryl Strawberry - Mets - 252 25. Robin Yount � Brewers - 251 26. Vladimir Guerrero � Expos/Nationals - 234 27. Luis Gonzalez � Diamondbacks - 224 28. Nate Colbert � Padres - 163 29. Dan Uggla � Marlins - 154 30. Carlos Pena � Devil Rays/Rays - 144

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Willie McGee? McGee hit 83 triples for the Cards, switch-hitted, never made the cover of SI, was already guessed by Edgy and stole Dwight Gooden's MVP award.

Hints: The two remaining players batted lefty, exclusively. One player hit his triples for an AL team; the other for an NL team. One player has the same first name as one of the correctly guessed players. One player, just like Roberto Clemente, made this list even though some of his triples were hit prior to 1962, and thus disregarded. Both players are retired, were All-Stars, received MVP votes and were Gold Glove winners. Both players made the cover of Sports Illustrated (back when that magazine mattered). I'm withholding some other hints that would make the identification of one of these players very easy. I suppose that this is another hint.

Rockin' Doc wrote: Okay, trying to get one that meets the post-1962 criteria. I'll go with Roberto Clemente of the Pittsburgh Pirates. he was racking them up in the late 60's right up until his untimely death. I saw Clemente triple in the first Mets game I ever attended. It was the only hit Gary Gentry allowed that day.

1. 2. Willie Wilson - Royals - 133 3. Robin Yount - Brewers - 126 4. Lou Brock - Cards - 121 5. Pete Rose - Reds - 115 6. Roberto Clemente - Pirates - 108 7. Carl Crawford - Devil Rays/Rays - 105 8. 9. Jimmy Rollins - Phillies - 99 10. Jose Reyes - Mets - 91 11. Rod Carew - Twins - 90

batmagadanleadoff wrote: 1. 2. Willie Wilson - Royals - 133 3. 4. Lou Brock - Cards - 121 5. 6. 7. Carl Crawford - Devil Rays/Rays - 105 8. 9. Jimmy Rollins - Phillies - 99 10. Jose Reyes - Mets - 91 11. Rod Carew - Twins - 90 I'm not considering statistics from before the Mets existence. So that would rule out Cobb and Mays and dozens of other players. Cobb is the Tigers career triples leader with 284. Cobb also hit 11 triples for the Phila. A's.

1. 2. Willie Wilson - Royals - 133 3. 4. Lou Brock - Cards - 121 5. 6. 7. Carl Crawford - Devil Rays/Rays - 105 8. 9. Jimmy Rollins - Phillies - 99 10. Jose Reyes - Mets - 91 11. Rod Carew - Twins - 90 I'm not considering statistics from before the Mets existence. So that would rule out Cobb and Mays and dozens of other players.

I wouldn't have gotten Crawford so quickly. 1. 2. 3. 4. Lou Brock - Cards - 121 5. 6. 7. Carl Crawford - Devil Rays/Rays - 105 8. 9. Jimmy Rollins - Phillies - 99 10. Jose Reyes - Mets - 91 11. Rod Carew - Twins - 90

1. 2. 3. 4. Lou Brock - Cards - 121 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Jimmy Rollins - Phillies - 99 10. Jose Reyes - Mets - 91 11. Rod Carew - Twins - 90

Frayed Knot wrote: Lou Brock Yes. For extra credit, where do you think Brock is on that list?

With two more triples today, Jose Reyes increased his Mets career triples record to 91. Since 1962, only nine other players have hit more triples for one team than Jose Reyes -- one less player than before today's game. Today, Reyes passed Rod Carew (90 triples for the Twins) on that list. Who are "the nine"? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Jose Reyes - Mets - 91 11. Rod Carew - Twins - 90

Spoiler alert: I have been to the future and know how this one ends. An eighteen-run victory for the Mets, featuring fighting, ejections, and post-game tears and backstabbing in the Phillie clubhouse. Book it. Hope you got back in time to put down a wager. Meanwhile, Beltran delivers a 405 foot fly out to right center field. He might miss New York, but he won't miss Citi Field.

Not counting pre-1962 stats(*), the Orioles have at least seven players who scored more runs than Jose Reyes: Orioles Cal Ripken 1,647 Eddie Murray 1,084 Brady Anderson 1,044 Brooks Robinson 991* Boog Powell 796 Brian Roberts 775 Al Bumbry 772 I say "at least", because my source (Baseball Reference) lists only the top 10 franchise record holders for the various statistics BR lists. So in theory, the 12th or 13th all time Oriole run scorer could also have surpassed Reyes' run totals. But we'll always have 1969.

I'm mulling not attending any home games from here on out. Just trying to do my bit, however small, to force the Wilpons out.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: And you can add the 1977 expansion teams to that list: Blue Jays - Carlos Delgado 889 Mariners - Edgar Martinez 1,219 And even the 1993 expansion teams: Rockies - Todd Helton 1,288 Marlins - Luis Castillo 675 Oh, ferchrissakes, this is getting to be ridiculous. The 1998 expansion teams' all-time runs scored leaders are: Diamondbacks - Luis Gonzalez 780 Devil Rays/Rays - Carl Crawford 765 Can't anybody here score any runs? Even ignoring all statistics pre-1962(*), the Mets franchise runs scored record is still the softest in all of MLB. Red Sox - Carl Yastrzemski 1,745* Reds - Pete Rose 1,741 Yankees - Derek Jeter 1,714 Orioles - Cal Ripken 1,647 Giants - Barry Bonds 1,555 Mil/Atl Braves - Chipper Jones 1,524 Phillies - Mike Schmidt 1,506 Cardinals - Lou Brock 1,427 Tigers - Lou Whitaker 1,386 White Sox - Frank Thomas 1,327 Cubs - Ryne Sandberg 1,316 KC/Oak A's - Rickey Henderson 1,270 Pirates - Willie Stargell 1,195 Twins - Kirby Puckett 1,071 Dodgers - Willie Davis 1,004 Indians - Kenny Lofton 975

So what are the odds that Thayer gets his own Topps Mets card? The outlook isn't brilliant.

It's a given that if Sterling gets hammered in the Picard lawsuit, the Wilpon/Katz group is a goner. The riveting issue is whether Wilpon/Katz can lose control of the Mets even with a favorable outcome in the Picard suit. If Sterling doesn't ultimately pay out more than their alleged fictitious profits from Madoff, are they then guaranteed to retain majority control of the Mets, or can they still lose the team? Any information or analysis on this front is what I find to be the most newsworthy. Fred's comments about Reyes and Crawford money and Wright's superstardom or lack thereof is just a side show.

"The best thing about Einhorn's 200 million dollar investment ... is that I'll get to keep my allowance".