batmagadanleadoff

Triple Dee wrote: I didn't hear a single Met fan complain at the time of the trade, even though it involved the Mets giving up the former darling-of-the-farm-system in Alex Escobar. I know. I admit that I was analyzing that acquisition with my hindisght goggles over my eyes. But still, does this mean that now and forever, no one is allowed to chartacterize the Alomar pickup as a Met failure?

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Barely legal DeRoulets.

What would a Payson girl need a job for anyway? If she was with me, she'd never have to work. I'd show her how to spend her money. Our money. Edit: Goodbye Steve Bieser. Hello Wes Gardner.

AG/DC wrote: You're deliberately missing my point. I in no way said or implied that they made other good choices, so please hang your frustration over somebody else. I know that. I wasn't trying to disagree with you. I was merely using your quote as a starting point to point out what to me, were some of the other Met failures of that era. It was a nice seque from the Mets decision not to pursue A-Rod. I should have made that clearer.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: 1. As I recall, the Mets made Olerud a competitive offer. They weren't able to overcome his desire to play for his hometown Mariners. You're implying that they preferred Zeile to Olerud, and that's just not true. You're absolutely right. But you are recollecting an accurate report of but one version of the Olerud negotiations. You might remember that there were also other reports circulating back then that the Mets didn't try hard enough, that Olerud was re-signable, and that the Mets waited until the very last moment to essentially match the Mariners' offer, or if not match the offer, then to increase it by only a nominal amount. In this other version, the Mets attempt at resigning Olerud was doomed to fail, given Olerud's family ties to Seattle and his verbal commitment to Seattle's earlier offer unless some other team were to step up and blow Seattle out of the water, which the Mets cetainly didn't. It's no surprise to me that in signing with Seattle, Olerud demonstrated that he was a man of his word, given what I saw in him during his too short three year Met stint. If you believe this version of the events, then you can reasonably argue that the Mets didn't want to resign Olerud at all, and instead, purposely extended an offer that the Mets knew would be rejected because all the Mets wanted here was plausible but insincere proof that they tried their best. This doesn't make much baseball sense because Olerud was one of the most effective Mets ever. But then again, these decisions are rarely about baseball only. I'm not in a position to positively tell you where the truth lies because I simply don't know.

AG/DC wrote: I suppose they decided that they were better off investing elsewhere the money..... Yeah. Like in Todd Zeile over Olerud the off-season before. Or in the off-season after, Mo Vaughn, the overweight by about 100 pounds (not that those things really matter) first baseman who hadn't played a game in a year and a half. They got Alomar that same year also, didn't they? Well, Vaughn and Alomar certainly form the core of a terrific team. If it's 1995.

="AG/DC"]I don't suppose that. I suppose they decided that they were better off inversting elsewhere the money and dignity A-Rod and Boras were asking for. I don't really suppose that either. But somebody up there in Met brass land was a huge Ordonez fan, disproportionately out of whack with Rey's -ahem- skills. I know that Valentine couldn't stand Rey.

="Frayed Knot"] And who here (besides me that is) thinks all this 'I'm not even talking to Scott anymore on account of this opt-out business' is all a big PR ploy? Alex gets the contract he wants and Boras agrees to wear the black hat for the whole "misunderstanding" and timing of the opt-out drama -- but none of it matters since ARod's never going to need to negotiate another contract ever again. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if Alex and Scotty are having slumber parties during the Yanx first west coast trip ... they're just going to have to keep it quiet. I'll agree with you. I revived this old topic only because I came across the A-Rod Daily News interview for the first time just this morning. See what I'm missing because I didn't join the CPF until this week? Still, I always wondered what really went down when the Mets - A-Rod talks broke down? Steve Phillips and the Mets had their story about how Boras and A-Rod made unreasonable demands and the A-Rod camp countered with their own version, incompatible with that of the Mets. And how can us people with no access to the parties every truly know what happened in that off-season? When I saw him at Shea, attending the 2000 WS, I fantasized about a Met 2001 lineup featuring both A-Rod and Mike Piazza. Of course, A-Rod was still a shortstop back then so as an added treat, Ordonez would've been rendered superfluous, which to me, he always was anyway. So superfluous and at-batless, I should say. You don't suppose that in the end, the Mets simply decided that they were better off with Ordonez, do you? I hope it never emerges that that's the reason why the Mets backed off.

That Fielder's no fielder.

Frayed Knot wrote: For an explanation (or at least a partial one) read the opening post in the 'Rankings for Dummies' thread. And remember that Pelfrey's Met career hasn't exactly been stellar to date. Aha. So in a few posts, I won't be Mike Pelfrey anymore. But then Pelfrey might have a decent year or stick around with the Mets for awhile. Or both. And move up in the rankings. Maybe even pass ol' not pictured Steve Bieser. And then I might get to be Mike Pelfrey all over again. That's what Yogi once said: "It's Mike Pelfrey all over again."

I notice that I 'm assigned a new Met every 10th post (Like everybody else, I suppose). So now I'm Steve Bieser. Ten minutes ago I was Mike Pelfrey. This doesn't look like no upgrade. Bieser's still not pictured on the UMDB, and he was a Met even before they went to ugly black.

Triple Dee wrote: BML -- relax, take it easy Hey: Nice avatar. Whered'ja get it?

Triple Dee wrote: Does it make a difference whether Cairo was acquired for Willie's benefit (which I doubt anyway)? When you start looking at back-up infielders to find excuses, then you reallly are clutching at straws. I agree. No. But the point I really wanted to make is that Cairo and Matsui should never have been batting second. And if Castillo's gonna suck like Matsui/Cairo, then the same goes for Castillo. Seriously, the jury's out on Castillo and nobody knows for sure how his 2008 season's gonna go. (Of course, you can say that about anyone) But it looks a little bit like he's not the player he was two years ago. He seems to be breaking down physically and at the point where his performance curve is at the downward slope part. If Willie goes with Castillo as the #2 guy, so be it, but I have little confidence in Willie getting Castillo the hell out of there in timely fashion should it become obvious that Castillo is in career decline mode. We shall see. Still, the jury's out. Perhaps this all got lost in the whimsy, but here are my points: 1. Don't put crappy guys in the #2 hole. 2. Can Willie ever resist his temptation to sac bunt the #2 guy? If the #2 guy's not that good of a hitter, then he shouldn't be batting second in the first place, the hell with "bat control". This isn't 1908 anymore. 3. The #2 slot isn't some repository for the leftover guy who's just a tad better than the #8 hitter. The slot gets more plate appearances over the season than every other slot but leadoff. 4. Ordonez still sucks.

="batmagadanleadoff"]I won't blame Willie for being stuck with two crappy second baseman for that entire season. Actually, I'm gonna somewhat change my mind on this. I'll presume that it was Willie who campaigned the Mets to acquire Cairo, probably based on Cairo's surprisingly average 2004 season with the Yankees. I'll bet that Randolph really really really liked Cairo what with Cairo being both a Yankee and a second baseman. So now Cairo's on Willie as well.

="AG/DC"]Matsui and Cairo were never presented as a platoon. Matsui was the starter and Cairo came in when he was hurt, and continued to draw time as Matsui was never fully back. You're right. And more to your point, I won't blame Willie for being stuck with two crappy second baseman for that entire season. But Matsui and Cairo should never have been batting second. Every single game. And that's on Willie. If you remember, the Mets were in contention for most of that season. It also didn't help that Reyes batted leadoff all season even though he was just about the worst everyday player in all of baseball that season (and the writer who gave Reyes a 2005 MVP vote should forfeit his priveleges but that's for another post) or that Wright was buried in the #7 slot for half the season even though it was apparent that he was already the Mets best or second best player. That's all on Willie, too. P.S. If the first paragraph of your post was addressed to me, I'm not sure that I understand it. I was only commenting on the #2 hole.

="Fman99"]I'd find [Castillo]more agreeable hitting 7th or 8th and not 2nd. That should be Pagan's spot, once Reyes is back in the lineup. Yeah, but Willie Randolph's managing this team. And every Met fan should know by now that the role of the #2 hitter in a Willie Randolph created lineup is to make an out. This is Willie's way; how Willie likes to do it and that's that. What - You're gonna talk Willie out of a harebrained scheme? And so what Willie usually does to increase the odds that the #2 hitter will make outs at an even greater rate than just about anybody else is to stick just about the crappiest starter that's only slightly less crappier than the #8 hitter and stick that almost the crappiest guy in the starting lineup into the #2 slot. Then when Willie really wants to show off just how much in charge he is of everything, he has the #2 guy sac bunt to practically guarantee the out. Get it? He just about demands that the #2 guy make an out. You know why? Because he can, that's why. Because he's blessed with one of the best middle of the orders in all of baseball and so he can spare outs like he was Bill Gates burning million dollar bills. Why should Wright or Beltran ever get the chance to come up in the first inning with two men on base? They can homer just the same with one guy on base, or even with the bases empty. Why once, Willie even had the #2 guy sac bunting with a runner on second and two outs. It worked too. Willie said it wasn't a problem because when the Mets would come to bat in the next inning, they'd start off with a man on third and nobody out. Castillo? Pagan? That's a no-brainer. Just be thankful that second base doesn't consist of the splendid Matsui-Cairo platoon from Willie's rookie manager year. (And isn't Willie a rookie manager every year?). Those guys made more outs than even Ordonez.

AG/DC wrote: You have the URL of the page there, but not the photo. Yeah! I know. What am I doing wrong and also, is that a Coolbase? I'm not claiming that it is a Coolbase, BTW. Or that it isn't. I don't know. And you know what else? That stupid URL I posted that doesn't even bring up the image which is what I wanted to show in the first place instead of that stupid Url, well that stupid URl just extended the width of this thread beyond the boundaries of my computer screen and maybe everybody else's too and now I can't even read this page without having to scroll left and right like every two seconds. So there's that, too.

G-Fafif wrote: Eleven seasons in, the black home uniform has earned its bona fides. Come to think of it, the black home uniform has now had a longer chronological run than the racing stripes of 1983-1992. This is an interesting quote because there is a powerful association between all of those pleasant Met memories you retain as a fan of the team and the referable uniform. On the other hand, those events would have occured even if the Mets wore their Mercury uniforms every single day for the last 11 years. Let a team wear a uniform long enough, any uniform, and memorable things are -inevitably- bound to happen. I suppose that ultimately, it's a matter of choice, a balancing act between many factors, most of which are personal and unique to each individual fan. Me, I can't wait for those black uniforms to disappear, just like I couldn't wait for the Mets to get somebody else, anybody else to take Ordonez's 550 plate appearances a year away from him. That took a few years longer than I would have liked, but at least it happened.

Still no image. Whatever.

Edit: I took out that URL that used to be here so that the page of this thread wouldn't extend all the way like to the Atlantic Ocean or something.

Triple Dee wrote: The way to tell whether the jersey uses "Coolbase" (not "Coolmax" my mistake, I know, same difference, anyway), is to look for the vented armpit sections Here's a shot of Santana on opening day against the Marlins. His road gray jersey does have vents, but I'm not sure if these are Coolbase vents. I could've sworn that Paul Lukas' Uni Watch blog reported that the Mets were wearing Coolbase road grays but now I can't find the quote. Also my image doesn't show up when I preview this post like the way your image does. So this post is a mess. But I'll send it along, just the same. Is that a Coolbase? You tell me.

Announcers indicate that Reyes is out of the game, with an update to follow. FWIW, he grounded into a DP on his last AB, where the play at first wasn't even close. Unusual for Reyes. In yesterday's game, he hit a high line drive up the right field alley that split the two outfielders and went all the way to the wall. As I was watching the play unfold live on television, and saw the ball at the wall, I was thinking to myself that surely this was a triple -- which it wasn't, to my surprise. Replays showed he ran hard all the way although he might have watched the flight of the ball for the first fraction of a second. We'll see.

Delgado strikes outs and it's all Randolph's fault for letting him swing away. This wouldn'ta happened ih he'da sacrificed. Now Church's up and he'd better be sac bunting.

Delgado leads off the bottom of the 11th. Time for a sacrifice.