batmagadanleadoff

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?

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

And you can add the 1977 expansion teams to that list: Blue Jays - Carlos Delgado 889 Mariners - Edgar Martinez 1,219

Reyes' all time franchise run record is soft and reflects, more than anything else, the Mets historical failure to develop and keep long-term, offensive powerhouse players. Reyes' 660+ runs wouldn't top, or even come close, to matching the record holders in runs scored for any of the Mets' expansion contemporaries, or any of the four 1969 expansion teams: Angels - Garrett Anderson 1,024 Colt .45s/Astros - Craig Biggio 1,844 new Senators/Rangers - Rafael Palmeiro 958 Pilots/Brewers - Robin Yount 1,632 Royals - George Brett 1,583 Padres - Tony Gwynn 1,383 Expos/Nationals - Tim Raines 947

Jeff Francouer on how Citifield is too spacious and hurting David Wright. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Kansas-City-Royals-Jeff-Francoeur-complains-about-spacious-dimensions-of-New-York-Mets-Citi-Field-051111 Jeff Francoeur in the month of May: .239/.304/.413 92 AB, 6 BB, 4 HR

The Mets� Bobblehead Curse Lives By KEN BELSON The Mets� lineup of bobblehead misery. In the latest issue of New Yorker magazine, Fred Wilpon said that the Mets were �snakebitten� because of the rash of player injuries, last-season meltdowns and financial calamities to befall the club the last few seasons. If Wilpon wants to at least figure out why so many of his players end up on the disabled list, he ought to look at the curse of the bobblehead. Since 2002, nearly every player who has been commemorated with a bobblehead sponsored by Gold�s Horseradish has already been injured, gotten injured or ended up performing poorly. Marc Gold, co-owner of Gold Pure Food Products and a lifelong Mets fan, said that his company�s signature horseradish has �tons of of health benefits.� But with tongue firmly in cheek, he noted the sad scroll of Mets who have been honored by the company with a bobblehead day. Mike Piazza was given a bobblehead day in 2002 and finished the year with 33 home runs and 98 runs batted in. The next year, he hit 11 home runs in 68 games. In 2003, John Franco had a bobblehead day. �He had been injured and was coming back midseason, so we thought it would be great,� Gold said. But Franco�s recovery was short-lived. He pitched in 38 games that year before his numbers went downhill the next season, his last with the Mets. The next year, Kaz Matsui, who was heralded as the next Ichiro, was given a bobblehead. �Great preseason hoopla,� Gold said, �But �� As the face of the new Mets, Pedro Martinez was deserving of a bobblehead in 2005. It turned out to be his last effective year on the mound. David Wright was an anomaly in 2006. �A great choice and one of the greatest Mets of all,� Gold said. The grim list continues: Paul Lo Duca in 2007 was not nearly the sparkplug he was the year before, when the Mets went to the playoffs. Johan Santana was welcomed in 2008 with a bobblehead and performed valiantly. His record of staying healthy since then has been spotty. Francisco Rodriguez got a bobblehead in 2009. The next year, he assaulted his father-in-law and injured his hand. Last year, Jason Bay was celebrated. �Where did the home runs go?� Gold said. �He did not even play on his bobblehead day.� The streak appears intact this year. The next Gold�s Horseradish bobblehead day is on Tuesday, July 19. Hopefully this year�s recipient, Ike Davis, will be off the disabled list by then. http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/the-mets-bobblehead-curse-lives/ Epilogue: Davis not progressing as Mets hoped CHICAGO -- Injured first baseman Ike Davis is not progressing nearly as quickly as the Mets had hoped, keeping the date of his return in doubt. "He thought he'd be back tomorrow, and he's not even on the field yet," Mets manager Terry Collins said after Thursday's 9-3 loss to the Cubs. Davis, who originally hit the disabled list on May 11 with a sprained left ankle, expressed optimism earlier this month that he would be able to return when first eligible this week. But Davis has not progressed at all in his rehab, confined to pool workouts on Wednesday and Thursday. The Mets still have no clear timetable for his return. http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110526&content_id=19605432&notebook_id=19619860&vkey=notebook_nym&c_id=nym

Reyes 1.0 Murphy 1.0 Thole 0.75 Dickey 0.75 Bay 0.5 Rodriguez 0.2 Buchholz 0.2

DATEMETS GAMES PLAYEDGAMES K-ROD FINISHEDON PACE TO FINISH...*4/1/111 (0-1)004/3/113 (2-1)004/6/115 (3-2)1324/8/117 (3-4)1234/14/1113 (4-9)3374/17/1116 (5-11)4404/24/1122 (9-13)6444/26/1123 (10-13)7494/27/1124 (11-13)8545/1/1128 (12-16)8465/3/1129 (12-17)8455/6/1132 (14-18)10505/7/1133 (15-18)11545/9/1135 (15-20)11505/10/1136 (16-20)12545/12/1137 (17-20)13=#000000]565/13/1138 (18-20)14595/19/1143 (21-22)17645/20/1144 (22-22)18665/26/1149 (23-26)1962 A round-up of recent K-Rod posts: ... Also did an interesting piece on trading Rodriguez (easier than you might think). That was interesting. If they can trade him, they should do it, even if it hurts their chances (such as they are) for 2011. Especially if that money can go towards securing Jose Reyes. I don't know who the "closer" would be. (Isringhausen? Beato? Buchholz?) I also don't know that it matters a whole lot, but everyone will think that it does. Try this: If trading Rodriguez is about freeing up money to sign Reyes... ...and if freeing up money to sign Reyes means they get to keep him for the last two months of the season, whether they sign him during the season or not... ...and if the difference between Reyes and the shortstop who replaces him is greater than the difference between the pen with Rodriguez and the pen without, for whatever period remains after trading him... ...then trading Rodriguez doesn't diminish the Mets chances of winning this year. Thus begins our culture of innovation. batmagadanleadoff wrote: The reason that K-Rod is willing to waive his $17.5M option, I believe, is because once he gets past all the bluster and all the posturing and tough-talk and the veiled threats that his agent and the Players Union are making about enforcing his option and filing a grievance if it should come to that ---team K-Rod must know that any intelligent team should be able to purposely prevent K-Rod's option from vesting easily, and without consequences. On the other hand, it's the Mets we're talking about here -- the gang that couldn't shoot straight. frankie rodriguez has been excellent this year. in 23 innings, he's allowed all of two runs (though there could be inherited runners he's allowed to score). per fangraphs, he has been worth 0.6 wins above replacement. jose reyes has also been excellent this year. in fact, according to fangraphs, he's our best player, and is worth 2.5 wins above replacement. prorating these performances over an entire season, and assuming that these performance levels are maintained throughout the season, we have frankie at 2.0 wins above replacement and jose at 8.4 wins above replacement. so, in order for trading frankie to keep jose to work our poorly for the mets, presuming the mets are able to keep only one, the mets would have to replace him with a reliever or group of relievers who are collectively worth -1.9 wins per 48 games, or -6.4 wins over the course of an entire season. alternatively, the only way that trading jose reyes makes the mets a better team this year is if they replace him with a 6.4 win shortstop. by the way. jose reyes is the best shortstop in the majors this year with his 2.5 WAR, leading alexei ramirez and asrubal cabrera at 2.0 WAR. last year, the top shortstop was troy tulowitzki, at 6.6 WAR. yes, the gap between jose playing like he is for a full year and frankie pitching the way he is for a full year, is a smidge less than troy tulowitzki. if it comes down to choosing between the two players, is it even a choice? i mean, damn. last year, about 100 pitchers were worth at least 2 WAR, including kyle davies, paul maholm, and barry zito, and 144 batters, including jeff keppinger, jorge posada, and derrek lee. thus far this season, torii hunter, chipper jones and aaron rowand are all 0.6 WAR players. thus far this season, jon niese and jeremy guthrie are 0.6 WAR pitchers. that is how much frankie rodriguez is worth. i think we can get much more in return than a chipper jones '11, or a barry zito '10. i don't think we're trading reyes for a '10 tulo. Well, I think some depends on the pen. While you're theoretically replacing Frankie with Beato or likely Izzy if he's still got his arm on, you're actually taking 20 or so innings that he would've pitched, and given them to someone like Igarashi who'd be promoted to take the spot on the roster. Those innings wouldn't be in the 9th, but would they necessarily be lower leverage? As with most things, I'm okay with that idea if they reassign his money to something valuable like Reyes. If they turn around and sign some B closer for 65-70% of the effectiveness of K-Rod, I'd just as soon the Mets try to extend Frankie themselves. If they kept him at his current rate, the difference actually ends up being what Reyes would likely get as a raise. There are a lot of facets to this though. Trading him is actually better than avoiding the vest, as they save the $3.5 million buy out. The Mets bullpen has been pretty damn good lately, and while you probably don't lose much having Izzy close, the overall depth of the bullpen does decrease, and if you had to pick the 'weakest' part of the Mets as a whole, it just might be the rotation. But if you have confidence in the bullpen, you can have a quicker hook on the starters. Then again, maybe the Mets acquire someone, Pelfrey and Niese pitch like they do at their heights last year, and Santana returns and the starters actually look better. Very complicated decision for Alderson, and there isn't an obvious 'right answer' as it all depends on the package in return, how they're going to use their money, and hte payroll next year. I'll take Jeremy Guthrie for Rodriguez, is that what you're asking? I really think everything is going to work out now , K-Rod will be back , in fact he'll waive the clause and sign a longer deal to say a Mets player ,news on Reyes extension should be coming soon... stop being Debbie Downers guys. batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Am I reading the box score correctly? Did the Mets really let K-Rod finish this lost cause of a game? I guess that Einhorn's 200 million is burning a hole in Freddie's pocket. Yes. It certainly suggests that the Mets aren't worried about it, so why should we be? bingo Me? Worried? Au contraire. *Remainders are always lopped off and never rounded up to the nearest whole number.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: TransMonk wrote: This is a lame game, gang. A Misch appearance is probably the #1 or #2 indicator of a game's lameness, absent any other information about said game. You spoke too soon. Because it's looking like lame games at least every 5th game near term, going forward.

metirish wrote: Ceetar wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Am I reading the box score correctly? Did the Mets really let K-Rod finish this lost cause of a game? I guess that Einhorn's 200 million is burning a hole in Freddie's pocket. Yes. It certainly suggests that the Mets aren't worried about it, so why should we be? bingo Me? Worried? Au contraire.

Am I reading the box score correctly? Did the Mets really let K-Rod finish this lost cause of a game? I guess that Einhorn's 200 million is burning a hole in Freddie's pocket.

I'm sorry to read about this terrible news. My condolences to the Brand family and to anyone here who had the pleasure of meeting or socializing with Mr. Brand. I never met Dana but I read his thoroughly enjoyable Mets book.

Edgy DC wrote: Photographer gives you a lower rate in exchange for permission to show your beautiful C-list celebrity faces on his or her website. (This was not a deal offered to me at my wedding.) Got pics?

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: ... Also did an interesting piece on trading Rodriguez (easier than you might think). That was interesting. If they can trade him, they should do it, even if it hurts their chances (such as they are) for 2011. Especially if that money can go towards securing Jose Reyes. I don't know who the "closer" would be. (Isringhausen? Beato? Buchholz?) I also don't know that it matters a whole lot, but everyone will think that it does. Francisco Rodriguez willing to waive no-trade and $17.5M option if Mets' trade partner re-signs him The reason that K-Rod is willing to waive his $17.5M option, I believe, is because once he gets past all the bluster and all the posturing and tough-talk and the veiled threats that his agent and the Players Union are making about enforcing his option and filing a grievance if it should come to that ---team K-Rod must know that any intelligent team should be able to purposely prevent K-Rod's option from vesting easily, and without difficulty or consequences. On the other hand, it's the Mets we're talking about here -- the gang that couldn't shoot straight.

themetfairy wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: I feel ancient asking this question, but why would a married couple want to post their wedding pictures on the internet? I don't see any good coming from that. It's way easier sending an e-mail link to people than to print up multiple sets of photos. You can share the pictures with more people, especially friends who live a distance from the bride and groom. OK. This makes sense to me, but only if the pics are password protected, like Ceetar's post demonstrates.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: ... Also did an interesting piece on trading Rodriguez (easier than you might think). That was interesting. If they can trade him, they should do it, even if it hurts their chances (such as they are) for 2011. Especially if that money can go towards securing Jose Reyes. I don't know who the "closer" would be. (Isringhausen? Beato? Buchholz?) I also don't know that it matters a whole lot, but everyone will think that it does. Francisco Rodriguez willing to waive no-trade and $17.5M option if Mets' trade partner re-signs him

I feel ancient asking this question, but why would a married couple want to post their wedding pictures on the internet? I don't see any good coming from that.

soupcan wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Where's Doug Flynn? Wasn't he your favorite? You couldn't have thought that Flynn was gonna be the next Joe Morgan because then the Reds would've kept him. And Ryne Sandberg was still a teenager. Correct! However as wide-eyed and Ceetar-ish as I was, I knew Flynn would never be much of a hitter. Loved him for that sweet, sweet golden glove and I would never have considered trading him. The one solace I took from those lean years was that the Mets would either lead the league or be near the top in DPs turned. It was the ONE thing they did well and how could that continue without Flynn?! Of course leading the league in DPs also meant that your team had to allow quite a lot of runners to reach base, which was...um, not really a good stat. I'm gonna sign off the CPF for now. I'm probably the last Mets fan you'd wanna have an extended conversation with about Doug Flynn.

Ed Kranepool -- Teflon Eddie. (I'm probably speaking too soon).

Well then look on the bright side. Josh Thole could develop into the next Johnny Bench; Miguel Tejada -- the next Ernie Banks. The Giants might give us Tim Lincecum for Jose Reyes. If Dillon Gee learns to pitch like Greg Maddux and Johan Santana has another Cy Young caliber season, the Mets should be competitive. Uncanny. My mindset from 8th - 10th grade: John Stearns could develop into the next Johnny Bench; Frank Taveras -- the next Ernie Banks. The Dodgers might give us Fernando Valenzuela for Hubie Brooks. If Tim Leary learns to pitch like Tom Seaver and Randy Jones/Mickey Lolich has another Cy Young caliber season, the Mets should be competitive. Where's Doug Flynn? Wasn't he your favorite? You couldn't have thought that Flynn was gonna be the next Joe Morgan because then the Reds would've kept him. And Ryne Sandberg was still a teenager.

metirish wrote: I don't think Santana has the personality to draw fans in numbers to a game. If the Mets are irrelevant by the time he returns, I don't think Santana will improve Mets attendance meaningfully, if at all. And if the Mets are out of it and Santana struggles with a diminished repertoire, fugghedaboutit.

Ceetar wrote: I just refuse to be all doom and gloom and guess that they're going into a 3-year rebuilding process of suck when there are no more signs out of Flushing that they will than won't. Well then look on the bright side. Josh Thole could develop into the next Johnny Bench; Miguel Tejada -- the next Ernie Banks. The Giants might give us Tim Lincecum for Jose Reyes. If Dillon Gee learns to pitch like Greg Maddux and Johan Santana has another Cy Young caliber season, the Mets should be competitive.

Ceetar wrote: I'm sure there's a limit, a budget, an idea. But Alderson has made that clear that .... Alderson said this and Freddie said that. Between the fact that nobody in the Mets FO is ever bound by anything they tell you (Whaddya gonna do if they lied to you? Sue them? Root for the Phillies?) , the vast wiggle room that they enjoy from their purposely vague comments, and the changing-every-minute nature of the Madoff affair, what Alderson or Wilpon tell you today is absolutely meaningless. To hang your hat on their every word, parsing their comments to the ridiculous nth degree for some guidance that you think you're gonna discern is a waste of your time. You might as well have a conversation with your pet cat.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I don't see where Sandy says that the $100 million figure is untrue (which is what I was hoping to see) just that we shouldn't overreact to it. All I can say is, if the Wilpons can't afford to run a large-market team like a large-market team, they need to step aside. The sooner the better. You're preaching to the choir, here. The even bigger insult will occur if the Mets intend to continue to charge fans close to $200 for an infield field level ticket to watch a mid-market payroll team.

We don't need a Shortstop.