Frayed Knot

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Jack is putting away Eastern League batters like they were burritos: 49 whiffs in 26.2 IP and cut down the walks (14, still a few too many) and ERA (2.70). Hasn't allowed a homer yet. ERA was 0.77 in the month of May. I noted (in the 'Bully 2014' thread) how Leathersich had given up 6 walks in his first 6-2/3 innings of the season - meaning that his current 14 BBs in 26.2 IPs translates to just 8 in his last 20 Still somewhat high but obviously greatly improved since the shaky start.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I think Soup is posting on a secret forum with Abogdan and Olerud Owned and Gary Cohen Jr. and Dinosaur Jesus and Holy Chicken and Joe Tundra and Joe Randa, Professional Hitter and Big Al and Ms Met and SI Metman and Gregory Gewitrz and RkFast Fuckin' elitists!!

You know the old saying; if it ain't broke, tinker with it only slightly. Cy Oung gets swapped out for Abreu, while Brewers stay the same except for switched 1B-men Ruben Tejada, ss Daniel Murphy, 2b David Wright, 3b Curtis Granderson, lf Bobby Abreu, rf Lucas Duda, 1b Taylor Teagarden, c Matt den Dekker, cf Jacob deGrom, rhp Scooter Gennett, 2b Ryan Braun, rf Jonathan Lucroy, c Carlos Gomez, cf Aramis Ramirez, 3b Khris Davis, lf Mark Reynolds, 1b Jean Segura, ss Wily Peralta, rhp

Matsuzaka - 3.4 Black - 0.4 Mejia - 0.4 Murphy - 2.0 Teagarden - 3.8

Brown - 2.0 Flores - 1.5 Tejada - 1.0 CYoung - 1.0 Campbell - 0.5

Zvon wrote: Is it safe? I'd say we have at least a 50/50 shot at winning this one.

Oh Familia, you're breaking my heart you're shaking my confidence daily

Teagarden has a version of the Chase Utley-ish truncated follow-through kind of swing - at least while going towards the opposite field. Haven't seen him pull one yet.

Talk about your Tea-garden parties!!

#980 = Dana Eveland #981 = Taylor Teagarden

If someone were to suggest to you say two years ago that Carlos Gomez would be hitting 4th in a lineup where Ryan Braun hits 2nd you'd think he was a bit daft.

Combining the middle infielders of the Brewers gives you (sort of) Jean Genet Les Boys do baseball?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: You prolly saw he previously took exception to being tagged hard between the bases by Donaldson. Which makes it all even worse seeing as how that was the tamest 'hard' tag in the history of mankind. For those who missed it - Machado was essentially trying to dodge a tag between 2nd & 3rd so when his impromptu dance move put himself off balance it led to a medium-light tap on the chest being enough to knock him over. That he managed to spike his helmet to show his outrage before even hitting the ground pretty much lends credence to the pissed-at-himself theory. Machado should just say 'No Mas' at this point and take his five games.

metirish wrote: Mets might announce a crowd of 28,000 but there won't be that many there .... Since the more-or-less merger of the two leagues ALL teams announce the number of tickets sold rather than asses-in-seats. It used to be the AL announced tickets sold while the NL did only the turnstile count but, since the visiting team gets a percentage of the gate, one standard was needed once inter league games started. Not that any of that is news to most people who either follow or cover the game, but it doesn't stop some (Francesa among others) from acting as if the Mets are both the inventors and the sole users of this form of deception.

metsmarathon wrote: the mets last year drew greater attendance than all but three teams in 1977. the mets last year drew greater attendance than the 1972 mets. the mets this year have already drawn greater attendance than the 1979 mets, for their entire season. B-b-b-but baseball's dying ... nobody even follows the sport anymore.

Carlyle - 0.6 Torres - 0.6 Murphy - 2.0 Tejada - 1.5 Duda - 1.5 Granderson - 0.8

Ceetar wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: But again, for all our "good pitching and shitty hitting", we're essentially league average in both runs allowed [4.08 vs NL Avg of 4.02] and runs scored [NYM = 4.00 vs 4.02] One can't help but wonder how we'd be doing with a couple of line drives falling into gaps instead of at fielders. Sure, but every team can say that and the only "evidence" we have that this is happening more often than usual to the Mets is that we watch all the games while only occasionally seeing other games.

But again, for all our "good pitching and shitty hitting", we're essentially league average in both runs allowed [4.08 vs NL Avg of 4.02] and runs scored [NYM = 4.00 vs 4.02]

LoDuca occupied a very strange place in NYM psyche & history. He had that one terrific year w/the Dodgers--essentially it was his rookie year except that it really wasn't due to three partial seasons prior to that and was 29 y/o at the time--but he seemed to be treated by a large portion of NYM fans (both before and after acquiring him) as if that year [.320/.374/.523 - 25 HRs] was the norm for him even though he went five seasons between that and his arrival in NY without coming close to duplicating it. Not that he played bad here, at least not initially (his 1st season might have been his best after that 1st one in LA) but by year 2 he was a 35 y/o not very good defensive catcher with a 79 OPS+ that was headed in the wrong direction. Then there was the playing up of his NYC/Italian roots even though he left NY at age 2 and admitted that he had no real connection to the city. But the birth certificate and the vowel-ending last name was enough for some fans & media (Joe Benigno in particular) to make him a go-to favorite well above and beyond his mostly mediocre level of play. I miss the part where all of that adds up to him being owed some kind of teary-eyed sendoff for all the years and blood, sweat, and tears, and that's even before we get into the part about the steroids, the late night club hopping, and the teenage girlfriends.

"But was she a pro?" [fimg=400:2df54294]http://us.cdn291.fansshare.com/pictures/jamesbelushi/still-of-rob-lowe-and-james-belushi-in-about-last-night-large-picture-518873143.jpg[/fimg:2df54294] "A pro? A pro Danny is how you think of yourself"

Fman99 wrote: So we suck? Well, yeah. But the sucking is being magnified by bad luck and such* so we may not be sucking quite as badly as it looks right now is all. Or at least that's my story and I'm sticking to it. * Losing six straight while being outscored by a total of ten runs over that time is, for instance, almost impossible to do even on purpose - which, despite appearances, I don't actually think they're doing.

MFS62 wrote: There have been many discussions over the years, here and elsewhere, about the concept of clutch, whether or not it exists, and if so, how to quantify it. But I think watching the Mets this year may be bringing us ever so much closer to defining the concept of choke. To clarify, the discussion has never been whether or not the concepts of clutch and choke (two sides of the same coin) exist or not, of course they do. There are 15 games/day in MLB that produce clutch/choke ABs, innings, pitching performances, etc. Players have clutch days, clutch months, even clutch seasons. What the argument has always been about is whether certain players can be said to "own" these traits to the point where they can be counted on to perform markedly better/worse than their normal selves in defined clutch/choke situations*. That this year's NY Mets have been lousier than even their usual sub-par offense in situations like bases-loaded, and RiSP isn't in debate, it's fact - "you could look it up" Casey might say**. Where the 'stats guys' would disagree with the stereotyped old-timers who knew clutch when they saw it is in saying that simply because they have done so for this 60+ game stretch isn't a sign that it's destined to continue. And, really, even if one does buy the whole notion of clutch/not being in one's DNA in the first place, the odds that it'll affect an entire group of 25 at once based on nothing more than the fact that they're all wearing the same pajamas would be pretty freakin' odd. So anyway, where all these bad situational stats and one-run losses leaves Your 2014 New York Mets right now is that at the RS/RA numbers (currently -5 for the whole year) indicates that they are closer to a .500-ish team than their current sub-.450. And if some of those crucial other stats even get up to the point where they're merely at 'BLAH' level as opposed to the current putrid then the RS/RA ratio might even tip somewhat to the positive side. * and good luck settling on an agreed upon definition of that ** overall hitting (prior to Sunday) = .234/.314/.349 vs bases loaded = .159/.203/.270

What Eric Campbell needed to even reach the pitch he struck out on in the 9th inning

Right, because 2-run losses where you a) leave the tying on run on 3rd in the top of the 8th and then allow them to pad their lead with TWO hits off TWO pitchers after TWO are out and none on to make it back into a TWO-run game in the bottom half of the inning are sooooooo much less frustrating.

Have NYM pitchers thrown a wild pitch this year that WASN'T immediately followed by a run-scoring hit?