batmagadanleadoff

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/12/24/sports/baseball/mlb-trivia-quiz.htmlhttps://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/12/24/sports/baseball/mlb-trivia-quiz.html

Edgy MD wrote: The good news is that there are plenty of places to bet. I was mainly responding to this: Frayed Knot wrote: ...if [Cohen] starts making a habit of bad deals for the sheer splash of it then his is not going to be any more of a successful run than was the Wilpon's. Everybody makes bad deals. Even when they spend. The future is unknowable. Jason Bay was an unmitigated disaster and that might've been the most expensive Madoff-era deal the Wilpons made. Ditto David Wright's last contract. Cohen will be more successful than the Wilpons. I don't see how not, unless Cohen gets run over by a freight train in the near future. And even then, it will be because Cohen didn't have a chance, not because he was inept and a micromanaging meddler.

I'd bet anything that Cohen is going to shatter the Wilpons' record of, what was it, two first place finishes in 32 seasons? And by shatter, I mean in a good way. The Wilpons made plenty of bad deals by being frugal. In fact, there's a strong correlation there. You tend to get what you pay for. In just two full seasons, Cohen's Mets already have one division title. And a 101-win season, the second most one-season wins in franchise history.

I could care less about how much Cohen spends and about precedents. If Cohen wants to for all I care, he could take the attitude of "Fuck draft picks and fuck my draft picks and take 'em all away from me if that's what you wanna do with me. I'll just go nuts on free agents every single season and if I hafta carry a $500M payroll, that's what I'll do because I can afford that in my sleep. So take away my draft picks, please. I have so much money, that I can outrun and outspend whatever penalty youse have in store for me." He'll be 70 soon enough. He's already lived most of his life and there's no guarantee that whatever life he has left will be productive, or even sentient. He can't take his money with him when he goes so he might as well enjoy it to the hilt. That's what I'd do. I'm not him, so I'm gonna do the next best thing and that's to enjoy this sudden Mets splurge on top tier free agent talent as if his money grows on trees, while this lasts. If I was Steve Cohen and I could've known ahead of time, the sore loser comments young Steinbrenner made right after the Mets signed Correa, I would've offered Aaron Judge twice the money the Yankees ended up paying Judge.

Rangers, huh? How about that Chris Young vision?

I wonder what Kumar Rocker's doing?

A Boy Named Seo wrote: ...if a women consented to rough sex and it was way more dangerous and painful than she'd agreed to or expected, then hell yes, she has every right to withdraw her consent, and it doesn't matter fuck all at that point from what she agreed to the day before via text. In this example, she wouldn't have to withdraw her consent because she likely never consented in the first place. She can't withdraw consent after the fact, though, or after the conduct in question occurred. A Boy Named Seo wrote: Whether we agree on that point or not, hopefully you can acknowledge sexual consent is more than just clicking "I agree" on an iTunes EULA and that Trevor Bauer is still a complete and total douchebag. Yeah ... determining consent can be very complex (but not here) and yes, Bauer is a major douchebag even though I have no idea what an iTunes EULA is.

Next year's free agents include, at third base, possibly Manny Machado, who can opt-out. Aaron Nola is a big time pitcher in the class, as is Yu Darvish. Shonei Ohtani will head the class. I say Steve should sign all four of them.

A Boy Named Seo wrote: On consent, I think it's critically important we all keep in mind that a woman can consent and change her mind. A woman can consent multiple times and still change her mind. Especially if her face is being bashed in after giving consent. So after she had her head and face roughed up and beaten, after all of that ... then she withdrew her consent? Is that what you're saying? Anyways, I don't think she ever withdrew her consent. She consented all the way and then a few weeks later, went into hell hath no fury mode after Bauer unilaterally ended their relationship. She consented because after most of the "damage" was done, she remained in Bauer's apartment for about six hours even though, by her own account, she could have easily left hours earlier. And then after that, she agreed to go on a second date with Bauer. And then her own text messages evincing her willingness and consent to have rough sex. And if law enforcement believed that she withdrew her consent properly, Bauer would've been indicted. Anyways again, I agree with you that if she didn't consent, Bauer should've been --or should be-- criminally charged. There's no argument there. But she consented. Bauer's getting punished enough. MLB has a stricter code of conduct than regular society. Bauer's MLB career is probably over.

A Boy Named Seo wrote: Regardless, I don't root for dudes who think beating the shit out of women is sexy. You? I'm with you. I'd imagine that most people would find Bauer's behavior not only repulsive and despicable, but also incomprehensible. Still, Bauer's case should or should've been decided based on principles of fairness and justice, not based on what you or I like or don't like. If his accuser consented, than Bauer should be exonerated. One guy on this forum (read this thread) argued for punishment because of how badly his accuser was beat up. Which to me, is absurd. If she consented, she consented and her consent should give Bauer a complete defense so long as a person is legally allowed to consent to the behavior she consented to. It shouldn't matter how badly she was beat up if she gave legal consent. Otherwise, we might as well have a stupid rule where a boxer is allowed to beat up his opponent -- but not too badly. And if the boxer beats up his opponent too badly, he goes to jail. Anyways, an MLB hearing is not like a criminal courtroom hearing or trial. The rules of evidence in baseball are very different -- laxer -- and MLB's standards for what's permissible and what's not are very different from the regular real world. I believed Bauer's defense from the start after reading the public material very thoroughly. It's telling that he wasn't charged criminally, especially with him being a wealthy celebrity. Prosecutors love to go after big shots. Also, I think Bauer's MLB career is over. He's a pariah. And I hate to use such inflexible words like "never" because everybody, I mean, everybody comes back. Tonya Harding. PeeWee Herman. Everybody. But I don't think Bauer will. Close to 7,000 view here? Wow. That's a lot, isn't it?

[FIMG=394]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52582002850_9752004690_h.jpg[/FIMG]

Edgy MD wrote: I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see the Dodgers eat that. It was understood that Bauer was never gonna play for the Dodgers ever again, no matter what the outcome of his hearing. The Dodgers are done with him.

Edgy MD wrote: Please invite Hal to get behind my campaign to end the anti-trust exemption. Beyond that, I'm not sure what there is to "look at." I share most, if not all of your views on free markets and MLB. But not relegation, but that's neither here nor there. Still, if MLB was as free as you wish it to be, and its Anti-trust exemption was stripped away, even then, nobody would catch Steve Cohen and he'd still be the unicorn that he presently is and most teams still wouldnt be able to operate like he does. He has multiples more money than the other owners have and he seems to be running the Mets as if it were merely a game of Monopoly with the money being treated as if it were toy or make believe money.

I'm sure deGrom feels bad, in part, about his decision to leave New York. Still, I have no desire to read his farewell because in my heart, I'm convinced that he didnt want to play here anymore and would've re-signed with the Mets only if no other team was willing to offer him a deal that was in the Mets ballpark. I think deGrom wouldve signed with Texas even if they didnt top the Mets, so long as they were close.

Cohen's paying the Orioles 19 million dollars to take James McCann off of his hands. [FIMG=394]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52578444412_610b385e63_h.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=394]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52578444402_c2202bcf6e_h.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=394]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52578909411_dd44f72262_h.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52578914991_a79848d785_h.jpg[/FIMG]

Typewriter Chewing Gum 2022 Total Mets set - Code Name: Rock and Roll Part 2 [FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52579279915_6362ae2d7b_h.jpg[/FIMG] Typewriter Chewing Gum 2022 Ltd. Mets set - Code Name: All it Said [FIMG=394]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52586846975_278625683f_h.jpg[/FIMG]

If baseball had a hard salary cap of, say, two million dollars a year, there'd still be teams with no shot at the title. Was there ever a season where every team in every league in every sport had a shot? What's fair about anything? So all of a sudden we're now gonna start drawing a line with baseball because now the Mets are owned by a superduper rich fuck who's so rich, he makes other rich people look like paupers? If you want fairness, the first thing I'd do is confiscate all of Ivanka and Jared's money and then make them wash toilets in Times Square with their fucking tongues on National TV. This is long term capitalism. In the end, the top zillionth of one percent get to own everything.

[FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52578833010_d6e4104d42_h.jpg[/FIMG] [media=youtube]5nZnqtDdsws[/media] [media=youtube]b4pYANUAJAI[/media] [media=youtube]qd_7Bnxblo4[/media]

Edgy MD wrote: I mean to say that McNeil has had his position on the team encroached upon several times over now by big-ticket acquisitions. McNeil himself will be a big-ticket acqusition. He's a star -- a two-time all-star and a batting champ with 20+ HR power. He won the batting title, as if that's not impressive enough, playing half his games in a pitcher's park, in the era of baseball in Denver.

Andy McCullough writing for The Athletic: Steve Cohen spends money with a casualness, almost a flippancy that underscores his understanding of his own wealth. [***] Cohen has operated with ruthless directness this winter.... When there was an opening with Correa, Cohen did not hesitate. And why wouldn't he? Do you know how many millions are in a billion?

Edgy MD wrote: McNeil may have a big payday coming up, but I'm not sure it'll be with the Mets. Me neither. But he's been way less grumpy under Cohen than under the Wilpons.

Wanna know what the real Steve Cohen tax is? Almost half the teams making the playoffs. Because the Mets won't be winning the WS left and right no matter how much money they spend. No team will under this setup.

Plus you figger, Alonso and McNeil are gonna be getting big deals down the line. The Mets payroll's going way way up even from these current levels.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: "Clogged" from the perspective of Baty, Vientos, and Mauricio, I meant. Those guys are dead Mets walking. The Angels are gonna want top tier prospects when they hafta trade Ohtani. And there aren't too many teams out there that are gonna be able to foot Ohtani's next AAV, which is gonna be in the 50 millions. Chris Young's vision. Oh my.

Edgy MD wrote: Whatever his plans are, I hope they garner him a better nickname than "baseball's new George Steinbrenner." How about "Steve"? Just "Steve". Like Bono. Or Cher. Or Beyonce. First name only.