batmagadanleadoff

Edgy MD wrote: As for who would care, in the cases I cited above, fans cared. Some, anyhow. Yes. I was responding under the prism of offending deGrom to the point that he was dissuaded from signing with the Mets, which I now know was not the point of your original post. Edgy MD wrote: Much of the reporting after the Dickey trade and the Phillies signing of Wheeler led to accusations that the team was torpedoing both those guys on the way out the door. Maybe they were and maybe they weren't, but I understand avoiding saying much of anything at all, because there are only so many diplomatic ways of saying that somebody else thought he was worth more than we did. In fact, I understand very much the tendency to avoid saying much of anything at all. I would like to believe that eventually, some reporter is gonna get to ask the Mets pointed and well phrased questions about the deGrom negotiations and have the interview well thought ahead of time out to the point that he or she could follow up with intelligent questions depending on the answers given. Then what? TBD.

Yeah, but how could the Mets insult deGrom after the fact? Well they could, but who'd care? It wouldn't affect contract negotiations because they're over and done with: deGrom already signed. I thought you were getting at some kind of insult that persuaded deGrom, at least in part, to sign with the Rangers.

[FIMG=394]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52562172186_6cf9f0f7d7_h.jpg[/FIMG]

Edgy MD wrote: I think that, when the Mets state why they opted not to go as as high as another team, they tend to be accused of insulting the player with an ex post facto rationalization. I've been trying to answer this post but admittedly, don't understand it. How could the Mets insult deGrom after the fact by stating that they were unwilling to match Texas? And did the Mets even give a reason yet for not signing deGrom? Reporting is so sketchy, especially for a player of deGrom's caliber and given the extraordinary nature of the contract he ultimately signed AFAIK, the Mets and deGrom met. The Mets made an offer. And then the Mets never heard from deGrom's camp again after that -- not until deGrom and the Rangers had finalized a contract.

Edgy MD wrote: I would disagree with that. I think we've all read some variation on that, and allowed it to become an established truth, while we neglect to cite where we got it, and mostly don't remember where we got it, or what the break-even point actually is alleged to be. Bill James has been researching the value of stolen bases at least since you were in elementary school, if not earlier. Tom Tango and then like a zillion others. The break even point is in the neighborhood of a 75% success rate and the math you'd need to calculate this yourself is fairly simple and straightforward. You just need to assemble the data so that you can then calculate break even. Or just trust James and Tango and like every other reputable sabrmetrician. They're not defending their break even figures the way others claim there's an invisible magician in the sky who runs the world. This is just math and logic.. There's no mystery here, not by any stretch of the imagination. Break even might change radically in 2023 as the bases will be larger and pickoff attempts will be severely limited. Its gonna be easier to steal a base next season. Why would larger bases change the break even rate? they would likely change the success rate for many players, thus changing the number who should attempt to steal more often as they are more likely to hit that break even rate, but why would the break even rate change? The rules changes will likely change both figures -- the break-even point and the success rate. The two figures are independent of each other. All things being equal, base stealing will be easier in 2023. But this doesn't necessarily mean that the success rate will go up. because "all things being equal" is the operative phrase and all things might not be equal. The rules changes might also encourage lesser skilled base stealers to make more SB attempts, which could offset the improved rates that one would expect to be generated by the better base stealers. We'll see.

=roger_that post_id=114676 time=1670940931 user_id=128] Are we moving (we = baseball, not Mets or CPF) in the direction of teams having higher turnover of starting pitchers, so that every team will experience 70 or 80% turnover every year or two? When we will be literally able to ID team/years by who the starting pitchers were? In other words, am I overreacting to the Mets' sudden high turnover rate? Am I glorifying the stability of my youth, when the Mets' starters of Craig/Jackson/Willey/Fisher/Cisco seemed to last forever, but in reality had the same turnover rate of later Mets/ teams? Is this reality or just a fantasy?

[FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52559835431_4d076a6d28_h.jpg[/FIMG]

there may be secondary effects of having a base-stealer on first that are harder to measure, and it makes sense that these effects must surely exist - we just cannot measure how much value they have - of skewing the infield defense, or distracting the pitcher's focus, or degrading the catcher's ability to frame pitches, or affecting pitch selection, or being more primed to go first-to-third, or advancing on a bad throw, and so on and so forth - that i think teams and players should keep the SB in their arsenal.... Wouldn't these other effects already be baked into the formula, to a large degree? If these "secondary" effects impact run scoring, they would change the break-even number for base-stealing, which is a function of run scoring.

[FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52559373357_3cb83c2bb5_h.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52560295055_435216229f_h.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52559376712_165be9556b_h.jpg[/FIMG] [FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52560299170_1959a146a6_h.jpg[/FIMG]

I'm still refreshing. My fingers are killing me and I have to pee. But I must not leave the Agee page so I can find out when it's fixed as soon as it's fixed and then run to tell you. And you didn't even say "Simon Sez". Oh, the horrendousness of it all!

=whippoorwill post_id=114638 time=1670883341 user_id=79] Seaver...just as popular, Wright... just as popular, Piazza...just as popular, Hernandez... just as popular. I'm sure there's more. And that's not even counting my personal favorites, lol

=whippoorwill post_id=114637 time=1670883098 user_id=79] =batmagadanleadoff post_id=114603 time=1670864138 user_id=68] I mean, I just can't believe that the NY press hasn't flushed out all of these details by now. We're talking about one of the greatest .Mets ever and an extremely popular player with the fans. Granted, his popularity surely took a big hit this week.

=roger_that post_id=114610 time=1670870768 user_id=128] Keep refreshing Agee's BBREF page and let me know when you spot the change.

I mean, I just can't believe that the NY press hasn't flushed out all of these details by now. We're talking about one of the greatest .Mets ever and an extremely popular player with the fans. Granted, his popularity surely took a big hit this week.

Did the Mets state why they didnt go as high as Texas? I dont recall. The way I see it, the Mets made an opening offer, that's it. Did the Mets also say that their opening offer was also their final offer? What I do recall being reported is the Mets asking the deGrom camp to be kept in the loop and informed of whatever deGrom was doing. I wish we had more info. AFAIK, the Mets made an offer and then deGrom signed with Texas. That's it.

The Hot Corner wrote: I can only guess that in the dialogue between the Mets and DeGrom, the Mets were proposing a contract length that was much less than the 5 year deal offered by the Rangers. ... Yes, but we know this. That the Mets offered three years doesn't necessarily mean that they wouldn't have come around to offering more years. There are too many major questions about the deGrom contract negotiations that --surprisingly-- remain unanswered. Like why weren't the Mets given a chance to match the Texas offer? And did the Mets ever make it crystal clear that they wouldn't match the Texas offer? Among others.....

=Fman99 post_id=114581 time=1670850261 user_id=86] I give #48 away to the next guy who requests it. You want to salt that number away, you come talk to me when he's no longer an active MLB player. Right now he can eat a hot wet bag of Texas farts.

Edgy MD wrote: I would disagree with that. I think we've all read some variation on that, and allowed it to become an established truth, while we neglect to cite where we got it, and mostly don't remember where we got it, or what the break-even point actually is alleged to be. Bill James has been researching the value of stolen bases at least since you were in elementary school, if not earlier. Tom Tango and then like a zillion others. The break even point is in the neighborhood of a 75% success rate and the math you'd need to calculate this yourself is fairly simple and straightforward. You just need to assemble the data so that you can then calculate break even. Or just trust James and Tango and like every other reputable sabrmetrician. They're not defending their break even figures the way others claim there's an invisible magician in the sky who runs the world. This is just math and logic.. There's no mystery here, not by any stretch of the imagination. Break even might change radically in 2023 as the bases will be larger and pickoff attempts will be severely limited. Its gonna be easier to steal a base next season.

I'm not sure what miracle Cohen's expected to have brought about in the short time he's owned the Mets. He's on the right track and Rome wasnt built. Hopefully, some of the prospects pan out, giving the Mets cheap star talent, like it was with Wright and Reyes almost 20 years ago. Then Cohen can lower the payroll. Not that it's anything anyways. $100M to him is like a fancy dinner or two to regular people. When the Mets are in danger of losing draft picks because of the payroll, then I'll revisit this topic. And its not a guarantee anyways. How many WS have the Dodgers and Yankees won in the last 15 years? Its really a crapshoot now with almost half the teams qualifying for post season. Cohen's extraordinary wealth will allow him to sign top tier free agents but the Mets just wont be winning the WS all the time no matter how high payroll is. But Mets fans will get to watch top notch baseball and root for stars that'll finish among the leaders statistically and maybe even nab some personal hardware. And that's a huge and enjoyable part of being a fan so enjoy that. Unless you prefer Michael Cuddyer in his mid 30s.

If Gary Carter's number is in mothballs, then deGrom deserves to have a statue and Citi Field renamed after him.

By the way, BRef's pronunciation isn't entirely off (accent on 2d syllable). That's exactly how Agee's name was pronounced when Mets fans chanted his name: Ay-GEE!. Ay-GEE! Ay-GEE! So spare me the fucking dramatics. Horriible occurrence. Oh, my. Call the National Guard!

Edgy MD wrote: It's a yes-or-no question. How many times does he have to threaten to put his boot up my ass whenever the hell he feels like putting his boot up my ass before you finally respond on my behalf? Six times? Ten times? Thirty? A million? Never? Yes or no? Me, I'm too tired now from the horrible horrible occurrence involving Agee's mispronunciation on BRef. Just horrible. A day that will live in infamy. Think of the children.

Phil Mushnick, New York Post wrote: In 1969, Bill Parrinello, 12 years old and from Elmont, N.Y., wrote fan letters to his favorite Mets: Cleon Jones, Tom Seaver, Tommie Agee, Bud Harrelson, Ed Charles and spare outfielder Rod Gaspar, who in that championship season batted .228..... In 2005, Parrinello emailed this memory to The Ultimate Mets' Database message board. Gaspar may have batted only .228 in '69 but he did make the cover of Sports Illustrated that season, maximizing his only appearance in the '69 WS. [FIMG=333]https://vault.si.com/.image/c_limit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_172/MTY5MDk4NDkzOTUyMDA5NTA1/43067---cover-thumbnail-image.webp[/FIMG] Neat link to the UMDB in the NY Post.

The Hot Corner wrote: As in the vast majority of free-agent signings over the years, money is the predominant factor that determines where players sign. Most players will offer up all kinds of superficial and disingenuous reasons for accepting the offer that they chose to sign, but in the end, I believe it almost always comes down to the team that was willing to pay the most money for their services. Very few free agents are honest enough to come out and admit that they simply took the best financial package available to them. DeGrom is no different than most free agents that have gone before him. He simply signed with the team that that offered the most money to obtain his services. Agree. Still, I'd like to know why deGrom didn't give the Mets a chance to counter the Rangers' offer. Did the Mets make it clear that they weren't willing to match or to even come close to the Rangers' offer? Because I figure that ordinarily, the Mets had that courtesy coming as the only team deGrom ever played for and there being no animosity between team and player, as far as I know. Was deGrom worried that the Mets would top the Texas offer?

Years ago, BBRef had a feature that appeared right after the pronunciation of each player's name ----- a small microphone icon. You'd click on that icon and hear the player's name pronounced. The click triggered playback of an audio file. That feature, obviously, no longer exists. But when it did exist, I wonder if clicking on Agee's icon would have produced the correct audible pronunciation and that maybe, the written pronunciation for Agee is more of a typo instead of a misconception. Hominem. Hominem. Hominem.