Frayed Knot

Disturbing trends continue even if no runs allowed (yet): two innings, two leadoff batters on

He broke when Vientos threw to 1st, no return throw.

I sense a slight improvement so far.

The FOX'ing of this game makes it a 7:15 first pitch as opposed to the trio of 6:45 starts so far in the series. It also makes for longer commercial time so expect this game to finish close to an hour later than the others. And all this on a day where I have to get going early tomorrow AM

Taylor out-hit Bader last season by a small amount (44 points of OPS) as Bader faded badly over the last two months and played at least as good a CF. So they moved on and went with a Taylor/Siri combo. Now if we knew that this year's version of Bader was going to turn in the best season of his career and out-pace his OPS of '24 by 170 pts while Taylor would drop his by 120 on top of Siri missing 5+ months after fouling a ball off his leg then, sure, we could have used Bader. And if that were the case I might even have said so three times in a four line post since it was so super obvious. But I don't think we'd be pining for him if he merely repeated his 644/80 avg OPS/OPS+ for '22-'24 rather than it suddenly spiking to 825/125 this season and with a 940/155 as a Phillie, and 1395 vs the Mets

And today Anthony Rizzo officially retires. He will become "an ambassador" for the Cubs. They didn't say to which country. (do the Cubs even have foreign embassies?)

The team on the other side of NYC faring about as well as we are so far this week. The Yanx lost to Detroit 12-2 Tuesday night and are down [CROSSOUT]9-1[/CROSSOUT] 11-1 in the 9th tonight.

Edgy MD wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Yeah, the Mets could certainly have used Bader this year. Sure, particularly if you know you're going to get THIS version of Bader. But not only is his current 932/153 OPS/OPS+ (in just over 100 PAs) the highest of any point in his career, his previous high was 779 & 775 (114 OPS+ each) in 2020 & '21 But if you get the 657/86 the Mets got last year, I don't think we'd be bemoaning his absence. Well, with the absence of Siri and the crash of Tyrone Taylor and the wishful thinking that Cedric Mullins largely has been, the Mets could have used any version of the guy, the 2024 edition included. But the point is that Bader was no better a bet to out-perform himself this season than was Mullins Mullins OPS+ in 2023 & 24 = 101 & 104 vs Bader = 69 & 86 ... and Mullins is (slightly) younger

Frayed Knot wrote: Baserunners tonight: Phils 18; 10 H, 4 BB, 4 HBP Mets 7; 5 H, 2 BB Final total [CROSSOUT]is[/CROSSOUT] was: 22 to 8 ... but now three straight two-out/9th inning singles are making the stats somewhat less lopsided (22/11) oe: now 22/12 with a walk to Mauricio

So, following the discussion in the booth about career HRs vs Mets, Pat Burrell hit 1 in 7 of his HRs vs NYM (42/292 = 14.71%) I mean, he was a division opponent but so are/were most of the rest of those guys. All those ahead of him on the HR-v-NYM list had considerably more HRs than Burrell's 292: Aaron, Stargell, Schmidt, McCovey, Harper, etc.

Edgy MD wrote: Yeah, the Mets could certainly have used Bader this year. Sure, particularly if you know you're going to get THIS version of Bader. But not only is his current 932/153 OPS/OPS+ (in just over 100 PAs) the highest of any point in his career, his previous high was 779 & 775 (114 OPS+ each) in 2020 & '21 But if you get the 657/86 the Mets got last year, I don't think we'd be bemoaning his absence.

Baserunners tonight: Phils 18; 10 H, 4 BB, 4 HBP Mets 7; 5 H, 2 BB

Mullins 2025 OPS, pre-trade = 738 Bader 2025 OPS, pre-trade = 778 Mullins 2025 OPS post-trade = 556 Bader 2025 OPS post-trade = 932

Frayed Knot wrote: A decaying hunk of RBI cuts the lead in half. Of course he did. As I posted earlier in the year, when I think he's washed up, he does something good. I'll keep saying it and see if he can keep producing. Later Yeah, that's what you were doing.

Leadoff hitter on in four of the six innings Multiple leadoff batters on in three of those four The first THREE runners on in two of them Nothing bad can come from any of that.

A decaying hunk of RBI cuts the lead in half.

Ron: "Snagged by the long arms of the 6-foot, 6-inch Sanchez" Keith: "How tall is he, Ron?"

2R on 2H, 1 BB, 2 HBP, 2 K Not even making them earn it. Meanwhile, how does Otto Kemp, born on 9/9/99, not wear number 9?

Not crediting Mauricio at all. There was no need to hesitate (but he did, I saw it at the time) as that ball was nowhere near Castellanos. A good runner checks where the OFs are prior to the pitch so he should have read it better off the bat. We/the cameras don't see Mauricio again really until he's shutting it down as he approaches 3rd, but by that time the ball is already en route to the cut off man and Sarbaugh is giving the stop sign. So those comments above about how slow he was running are made mostly out of ignorance and/or from fans looking for scapegoats following another 'L'

Yes, and if you watch the clip you linked we see Stott taking the relay as Mauricio is pulling up to 3rd base having already been halted by Sarbaugh. So even though, as I noted in my opening post on the IGT thread of this discussion, Mauricio did hesitate briefly to check on whether the hit was catchable, the ball simply got out to the wall too quickly to score even a good runner from 1st, and it wasn't particularly close.

Thing is, by the time the 3rd base coach makes his decision to send or not he already knows that the RF didn't fumble the carom off the wall and he already sees the throw en route toward the IF ins't going awry, so those possible conditions are off the board. This leaves only bad throw/muffed catch left and, considering the ground still to be covered by the runner, it would have to be horrid throw/total whiff with no pitcher/backup in order to maybe score the run. As far as Vientos goes, he has to read the runner in front of him before he can even think about heading to 3rd so he doesn't, you know, wind up like the back runner in the Mets play referenced. And the fact that I think Mauricio had no chance is the same reason I don't think Vientos automatically advances even if we force the Phils throw home as he has less speed and further still to run. I doubt he was even at 2nd yet when (Stott?/Harper? ... probably Stott) gets the relay. And even all that doesn't negate the main point of my last post which was that I don't like the situation we wind up in even if he gets his ass to 3rd with two outs! Yup. Thought so at the time and still do.

This is just rehashing the same argument with different verbiage. The problem isn't a simple choice of 'taking chance' vs 'not taking chance', it's that the odds of success were so small that taking the chance there would have been not just risky but stupid. Sarbaugh is a reasonably aggressive coach and he was holding up Mauricio before he got near 3B. He wasn't even doing to 'go until I tell you to stop' wave. It was stop all the way. Which is why you don't give up Half the outs you have remaining for a player with a 5-10% chance of succeeding (I think it was more like sub-2% but I'll play along). And if Mauricio isn't getting to home then the much slower and without a jump Vientos is low odds at getting to 3rd. Wasn't it you who posted that 1986 Dykstra-to-Gibbons-to-HoJo game-ending double play clip recently? Well whether it was you or someone else, this would have been that only with the throw coming from deep 1st-2nd base rather than CF, and with neither play being close, and with neither runner having the option to barrel over the ball handler. And EVEN IF the whole intent is to make the defense 'make a play' AND EVEN IF it succeeds in getting Vientos gets to 3rd on the throw, we've now gone from 2nd & 3rd/1out [not sending] to 3rd only/2 outs [forcing the action] meaning that the upside of failing in the first objective also puts you in a worse position in the supposed fallback upside: runner on 3rd (where one would have been anyway), NO runner on 2nd [now need a HR or successive hits to tie, not a mere single], and there are two outs so no way to score via an out! I enjoy aggressive base running but this one just wouldn't have been within the length of a Pete HR of being smart.

Cubs were up 2-1 on the Braves. Braves call on Edwin's baby bro Alexis Díaz to pitch the top of the 8th: GO, HBP, BB, K, BB, BB The Braves are Alexis's third team this year: 6 games w/Cincy + 9 w/LAD. This was his first appearance for the Braves. His combined ERA (not counting tonight) in 2025 is 7.80 with a 1.47 WHIP His first two seasons produced a 5th in ROY and then an AS appearance in season #2 in 2023. I would have seriously advocated for getting him in the '23-'24 off-season but he's been nothing but bad news since. And now it's 6-1 Cubs so that means all his LOB runners have since scored which will just fluff up his ERA even more. It also means that the Cubs are one more game removed from being a possible target to catch for the Mets. Every day that passes they have more and more to worry about from the teams behind them than the ones in front of them.

Hagenman sounds like one of those guys whose name should have the more authentic double-N Germanic ending.

I hope Vientos Really feels like shit right about now.