batmagadanleadoff

If you still have the DVD, and can spare a few hours, I recommend a second viewing. The Secret is especially one of those movies where you pick up key elements the second time around. (2009 Academy Award winner for Best Foreign Film)

I don't think I'm motivated by protectionist concerns. If it was up to me, I'd consider any Japanese import for ROY, so long as his professional experience was used to determine his MLB rookie status. You make a good point about some of the early ROY's playing in the Negro Leagues. But unlike today's Japanese imports, Robinson and Newcombe, et. al. were, for a while, barred from playing in the Majors. I'm not suggesting that Jackie Robinson posthumously forfeit his ROY award.* But should the fact that Robinson and Newcombe were pros prior to playing in the Majors be the sole reason for allowing today's experienced veteran Japanese imports to qualify for ROY? * The Rotunda. That's another story.

Frayed Knot wrote: Normally first-year players don't have the pull to get that kind of language in their contracts but now several Japanese players have gone that route. But the Japanese imports have considerably more leverage than your MLB rookie/first year player. The imports are typically, still in high demand in their home country and also, free agents here, thus inviting competing teams both here and abroad to bid against each other for their services. As you know, an MLB rookie has virtually no near-term leverage to command more than the MLB first year minimum salary and cannot invoke a bidding war among other teams. In this respect, the typical MLB rookie has about as many options as an MLB'er who played under the old and infinitely restrictive reserve clause.

Frayed Knot wrote: Normally first-year players don't have the pull to get that kind of language in their contracts but now several Japanese players have gone that route. The Japanese imports are hybrids -- veterans really, but denominated as rookies because MLB defines a rookie by the amount of MLB experience only. On a side note, I'm against incoming veteran imports like Ichiro and Hideo Nomo qualifying for the ROY award. It goes against the spirit of the award and the common-sense definition of "rookie". If it was up to me, I'd define "rookie", at least for purposes of the ROY award, based on professional rather than MLB experience.

According to the major leagues� Rule 8 (i) (2), any player who is released after midnight Aug. 31 and before the next opening day cannot sign a major league contract with the same team until May 15 the following year. He can sign a minor league contract, which Takahashi would probably not do, but cannot be called up to the majors until May 15.... The 8 (i) (2) rule, which has been in effect for many years, was designed to prevent teams from cutting players and then signing them back for less money. The full article

Bud was the first manager to give Dave Magadan a legitimate shot at playing every day. Mags' combined OBP under Harrelson was over .400. Still, I'm going with disaster. Plus, Buddy didn't bat Magadan leadoff. He should've.

metirish wrote: This whole Mets pedigree is getting silly, from Riciardi's playing in the system thirty years ago to McClendon being a draft pick, it's daft. can he manage?, my memories of him are that he was very laid back and IIRC the word was he wasn't that good with the kids. I hear you, Irish. I can't figure out why so may fans are going gaga over the prospects of Backman as the next Mets manager. If they possess keen insights into Backman's managerial skills, then fine --- but to want Wally just because he played for Davey Johnson's Mets 25 years ago makes no sense to me. Bud Harrelson had the best Mets pedigree of any incoming Mets manager. And he was an unqualified disaster.

Right now, I'm indifferent on whether Tak re-signs with the Mets.

Along with Keith Hernandez, Tommie Herr, and Ozzie Smith, with Mike Ramsey as the utility guy, was part of an absollutely inpenetrable artificial turf infield back in 1982. From "Infield Errors Are A Cardinal Sin", Sports Illustrated, June 13, 1983: True, there's no more dazzling sight in baseball than Smith on the move. But his fellow members of the St. Louis infield are far from being eclipsed. Consider a recent week in the life of the Cards: The night before the 17th-inning Smithian spectacle, Keith Hernandez demonstrated why he's the National League's best first baseman. The Cards were leading the Astros 4-0 in the first, but Houston had runners on second and third with only one out. Phil Garner hit a high bouncer to Hernandez. Textbook: Give up a run and get the sure out at first. Instead, Hernandez fired home and nipped the sliding Terry Puhl. "When you've scored, you don't want the other team to score in the same inning," Hernandez said later. "I saw Puhl out of the corner of my eye and thought I could get him. You can say that if the umpire calls the runner safe it's a bad play, but you have to take chances." � ��* * * All the Cardinal infielders have good hands�the prime requisite�and are equally sound on turf or grass. Ramsey, Oberkfell and Herr were signed as shortstops, the infield's most difficult position, and began working out at other spots when Templeton looked as if he'd be a fixture at short. Hernandez and Herr were high school quarterbacks; as a result, Hernandez makes baseball's best throw off the bunt ("It's like a look-in pass over the middle," he says), and Herr can take punishment and still get off a relay ("With the line I had, I got used to contact," he says). The four are constantly talking and reacting to each other. "There's too little communication in baseball," Hernandez says. Theirs is more than the routine "I'll take the throw down" palaver of shortstops and second basemen. "Ozzie! Obie!" Hernandez calls out when he's playing far from the line with a righthanded pull hitter up. He's telling them to delay their throws until he reaches the bag. Herr gives a verbal signal to Hernandez, who can't see the catcher's sign from his spot at first, when a righthanded pitcher is about to throw a breaking ball to a lefthanded hitter; that way Hernandez can shade to the line. Smith sometimes, but not as often, tells Oberkfell when a lefty pitcher is throwing slow stuff to a righthanded hitter. "A lot of the time I'll tell him I don't want to know," says Oberkfell. "If it's a fastball, you have a tendency to relax. I want to be ready all the time." And with two outs and a man on first, Oberkfell will tell Herr to expect a throw on a grounder. Any time one player shifts position, the others will move too. "We don't want to leave too many holes," says Oberkfell. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1120924/1/index.htm

There was a time when George Foster appeared to be Hall of Fame bound.

Ceetar wrote: Centerfield wrote: According to Metsblog, the Padres GM Jed Hoyer has confirmed that Alderson has asked permission to speak to Paul DePodesta. How cool would that be if we got him? I can't believe how excited I am over this. I realize that the track records of some of these deputies aren't exactly stellar, but with the Mets resources, I feel like this team could become something credible. You hear good things about these guys, but sometimes I wonder if they're the 'chic' pick. I mean, everybody picks people they know and like, but sometimes you wonder if it wouldn't be better to look to see if somethings better than stick to the comfortable choice. btw, 3 months ago "Why would anyone want to work for Jeff Wilpon?" and Alderson basically takes a job 'below' him to be here, and Riccardi gets out of Boston as fast as he can when he's offered a shot here. He was basically sitting in a meeting with Theo Epstein and got up and left for NY. Hasn't word got out that Jeffy's a big bad wolf? Perhaps the word got out that Sandy's a bigger and badder wolf.

TheOldMole wrote: What does vesting mean? It's the act of putting on a sleeveless garment. Or, in this context, the clause in K-Rod's contract that entitles him to receive $17.5M as compensation for the 2012 season will have vested when he reaches 55 "finishes" for the 2011 season. The Mets obligation to pay K-Rod $17.5M in 2012 is conditional, and predicated on the number of games K-Rod finishes. If K-Rod finishes less than 55 games in 2011, the clause will not have vested and the Mets would not be obligated to pay him $17.5M in 2012. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/vest.html

MFS62 wrote: Wasn't there a thread that led to a question about opponents of the 1986 team who still played into the 21st Century? Was it spun off or renamed? I posted an answer and am trying to find out if I was correct. Later viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14991&p=379238#p379238

G-Fafif wrote: Pirates, middle of 1970, coinciding with opening of Three Rivers. That's exactly right.

Edgy DC wrote: Funny that they're mostly two-tenure guys, and only the two catchers pulled it off by weathering the Torre interregnum. Also known as Generation Pullover. Generation Two-Button Pullover. The Texas Rangers of the mid to late '70s are the only other team that I can recall wearing two button pullover jerseys. Which MLB team was the first to wear pullover jerseys (button-less and zipper-less)? Give me the team and the year.

G-Fafif wrote: Longest Ago Mets Still Active chronology here. Nice work. The Mora segment confused me. It took me two hours to realize that you had written the piece in September, before the regular season ended. Ryan and Orosco combined for an almost 20 year grip on LAMSA. Not surprising. Orosco appeared in more games than any other pitcher in the history of baseball. And Ryan started more games than any pitcher in the modern era -the only era that matters when calculating LAMSA- (second only to Cy Young, all-time). Orosco was loogied to the extreme at the end of his career. His 21st Century (or aught's) Games to Innings Pitched ratio is greater than 2 to 1.

I know who my suspect would've been:

Bobby Valentine, like Bud Harrelson, wore the 1969 style home uni as a player, and the 1986 style home racing stripes as a coach. If you include managers and coaches, Bobby Valentine and John Stearns are the only Mets to have worn the home unis of all four pennant winning Met teams. John Franco ('90-'01, '03-'04) and Todd Hundley ('90-'98) are the only Met players to have worn the '86 style home racing stripes and the unis of the 2000 pennant winning Met team

Here's the complete list: They Dressed Like Champions -- Twice Tom Seaver -- LWFS Rusty Staub -- Grimm Craig Swan -- JCL Dave Kingman -- HahnSolo Mike Jorgensen -- Edgy Ron Hodges -- JCL John Stearns -- HahnSolo Lee Mazzilli -- JCL All of these players had to have played in at least one home game as a Met during the periods 1965-1977 and 1983-1990. Harrelson wore both championship home uniforms but was an incorrect answer: He wore the '86 style racing stripes as a coach and manager, but not as an active player. Despite the World Series Championship theme to this quiz, Seaver and Mazzilli are the only two of the above eight players to have won a WS with the Mets; Staub is the only other player to have even appeared in a WS as a Met. Mazzilli is the only player on that list who was not a member of the '83 Mets.

They Dressed Like Champions -- Twice Tom Seaver -- LWFS Rusty Staub -- Grimm Craig Swan -- JCL Dave Kingman -- HahnSolo Mike Jorgensen -- Edgy Ron Hodges -- JCL John Stearns -- HahnSolo Lima Silly -- JCL Incorrect Bud Harrelson -- Edgy Tim Foli -- Edgy

They Dressed Like Champions -- Twice Tom Seaver -- LWFS Rusty Staub -- Grimm Craig Swan -- JCL Dave Kingman -- HahnSolo Mike Jorgensen -- Edgy Ron Hodges -- JCL John Stearns -- HahnSolo Incorrect Bud Harrelson -- Edgy Tim Foli -- Edgy One Met remains. I predicted to myself that this last remaining Met would be the last remaining Met to this quiz.

They Dressed Like Champions -- Twice Tom Seaver -- LWFS Rusty Staub -- Grimm Craig Swan -- JCL Dave Kingman -- HahnSolo Mike Jorgensen -- Edgy Ron Hodges -- JCL Incorrect Bud Harrelson -- Edgy Tim Foli -- Edgy ONE GUESS PER POST

Pretty good for not getting it. You're gonna hustle the forum and sweep the rest of the quiz, right? They Dressed Like Champions -- Twice Tom Seaver -- LWFS Rusty Staub -- Grimm Craig Swan -- JCL Dave Kingman -- HahnSolo

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm not sure I get the question, but ... Craig Swan. Example 1: Willie Mays would be an incorrect response. The home uni that Mays wore as an active Met player (1972 and 1973) was the same home uni that the Mets wore in 1969. However, Mays, as an active player, never wore the Mets 1986 style home racing stripe unis.

Pretty good for not getting it. You're gonna hustle the forum and sweep the rest of the quiz, right? They Dressed Like Champions -- Twice Tom Seaver -- LWFS Rusty Staub -- Grimm Craig Swan -- JCL