Frayed Knot

I saw it shortly after its XMas day debut. And enjoyed it. Did it break any new ground, or did I learn something I didn't already know? No & No. But it was well done acting and singing-wise, and the story it told was relatively accurate. It's an Oscar nomination, at least, for Chalamet. Bio Pics tend to almost invite those and he certainly didn't blow the opportunity. The timeline is from Bobby first showing up in NYC through his 'Going Electric' at the Newport Folk Festival which famously angered many of the folkie purists. The only name-changed-to-protect-the-innocent was the Greenwich Village girlfriend, reportedly at the request of Dylan himself as she wasn't a public person aside from her relationship with him. But the character is Suze Rotolo in everything but name. The daughter of immigrant Italian communists, she knew the Village and woke him up to many of the social issues of the day that were quickly absorbed into his writings. Most of the other actors were unknown to me aside from Edward Norton as Pete Seeger (not tall or thin enough but he had Pete's speaking voice down pat) or barely known to me, Elle Fanning* as Suze Rotolo/Sylvie Russo. Other expected characters such as Woody Guthrie, Joan Baez, Johnny Cash, Albert Grossman, Dave Van Ronk and others weave in and out of the story. "Get out there are track some mud on the carpet" -- Johnny Cash * btw, Elle and Dakota Fanning's father: https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=fannin001ste

=MFS62 post_id=182851 time=1736802489 user_id=60] I didn't say only.

That also meant the Padres couldn't bring Darvish or the Dodgers, Ohtani. So I don't see how to see this as a negative to the Mets only.

1) you can see her mother in Carlene's face 2) the marriage didn't last

So Camp Pete is saying: 'So, you only want to do a shorter deal, eh? OK, fine. It'll cost ya though' Armchair psychiatrist reading of these two proposals floated out there by Mr. Boras over the last few days suggests that they sound like they're designed to keep Pete at his stated first choice, and that's a good thing. Side effect is that the not-so-secret nature of these proposals lets potential other suitors know that these are more reachable numbers and so that brings that brings Pete into range of more teams willing to meet or top them.

With the 'Only for the Mets' implication being that Camp Pete is giving the Mets an exclusive shot at this wonderful short-term arrangement. But if they say 'No' then it begins to be shopped elsewhere and the Mets risk losing him and the loss will look like their fault. -- "They said no, not us" iow, it's just another negotiating ploy complete with a leak to make one side look like the good guys. I still think he'll return. But this sounds like just another step along the path and not necessarily the framework for a final agreement.

=metirish post_id=182682 time=1736540805 user_id=72] Fans that tangled with Betts banned indefinitely

No it won't.

Can we get this done before Easter, please? I predicting a signing announcement next Thursday, Jan 16. Why? Because it'll be the two year anniversary of this thread (and don't think that Pete, Scott, David, and Steve haven't been reading and keeping up on it).

This has become exactly what I long feared it would become, an exercise in retiring as many numbers as possible under the guise that any good NYM player without a retired number is being forgotten and/or insulted, or that team history isn't being "honored". But each new player added doesn't 'fix' the problem in too many eyes or even slow down the process. Instead it speeds things up as, before the current nominee is even inducted, speculation immediately turns to 'Who's Next?'*. And 'Who' often isn't in the singular. Some of the comments under that linked piece are even worse the the logic above it: - Cleon hit .340 in 1969, so no WS without him ... PUT #21 UP NOW!!!! (someone immediately approved) - Johnny Franco will be the only NYM Captain without a retired number (y'know, after we put Carter in) ... this is a wrong that needs to be righted!! - Beltran, but only if he goes into the HoF as a Met And once you start on the road to 'if-him-then-him-too' there are few he won't qualify Cleon: 12 years, 4,730 PA; 93 HRs; 521 RBI; 111 OPS+ HoJo: 9 seasons: 4,591 PA; 192 HR; 629 RBI; 124 OPS+ ... and he has a Ring too!! 'I mean, How can we not?!?[/i]' As if any reason that can be latched onto is not just a good enough reason but an unarguable one. This isn't a lowering of standards, it's an erasure. STOP!!! And maybe take a deep breath every once in a while. * It makes me so mad I want to just go out and piss on a wall

Let's just retire the numbers of everyone who spends at least five years with the team. It'll be so much easier that way. I mean, sure, you'll run out of numbers after a while, but at least they'll have one, and sometimes more, ceremonies each season and isn't that what this is all about?

Brian Matusz - LHP, an eight year career (2009-16) with Baltimore (plus one game as a Cub) after being their 1st round (4th overall) draft pick in 2008 Dead at age 37. No cause yet announced.

Freddie's and Olsen's deals are still TBD on how they work out long term. - Freddie is, first of all, a markedly better player and for much longer than Alonso. But also was two years older when he signed and so could be approaching the downward slope soon as he gets ready to hit his age 35 season with three years down and three more to go on his contract. - Olson was two years younger than Pete is now at the time of his trade/signing by Atlanta. He had the best full season of his career in year one of the deal [994/164 OPS/OPS+] but then fell to his worst this past year [790/118]. Nine months older than Pete, he's got five guaranteed seasons remaining plus one team option year. - Prince had to retire for medical reasons at age 32 but had already started a downward trend five years (and two teams) into his mega-FA deal with Detroit. Milwaukee (7 seasons) OPS+ = 143; Detroit (2) = 136; Texas (3) = 102. The structural issues with his neck that eventually ended his career certainly could have been a factor in his seasons with the Rangers as in only one of those three seasons did he play a full schedule, so maybe not strictly an age related decline. There were three seasons remaining on his deal when he was released from the team. But, in general, yeah, you don't need to go chasing each of the last contracts even if they start out OK. The Boras method has long been to argue that because Team X gave Player Y 'THIS' deal then the one your team offers to (somewhat similar) player Z needs to be the same. And who can forget his straight-faced Ollie Perez/Sandy Koufax comparisons? But just as writers liked to argue about deals the turned out poorly for the team, 'Hey, nobody held a gun to the owners head and made him offer that', the teams aren't required to repeat their own or someone else's past mistakes unless Boras suddenly starts bringing firearms into the meetings.

For a while there it seemed (just like Cal Sharpie's favorite books this past year) that you needed a one syllable name in order to be part of the 1960's era Pirate pitching staffs: Bob Veale, Steve Blass, Bob Moose, Roy Face, Vern Law, Bob Friend. They also had, for shorter periods, Don Schwall, Tommie Sisk, and Wilbur Wood

Yeah, the Dodgers' main gripe about Lux was that he wasn't a good enough SS. That's at least partly why Mookie got moved over there, lack of better options. But now they got the Korean player and signed last year's mid-season pick-up from the Cards Tommy Edman (y'all remember him?) to a Five-year deal. iow, Lux became expendable, but not garbage. He's also kind of similar to Edman as well as India but is 2-1/2 years younger than Edman and one year to India. The Reds have two years of control on Lux. And the other good thing about Lux to the Reds is that the Yanx were eying him.

So he just up and Skated Away from the Mets? [media=youtube]vcwl-Q7pAtY[/media]

=Centerfield post_id=182454 time=1736273446 user_id=65] Francesa, or someone like Sal Licata or whoever else is on talk radio, is asked to create an audience and be entertaining. They offer opinions. ... but as far as I know, they don't hold themselves out to be the authority on any of these topics, and don't claim to have any inside information.

Lest we forget, Lux is a former 1st round draft pick (20th overall) who was one of the top prospects in baseball (#2 mlb.com, #3 Baseball Prospectus, #4 Baseball America) going into the 2020 season. Has he lived up to all that? No, but that doesn't mean he never will. He came into 2024 without a set position (LAD used him at SS, 2B, 3B, LF, and CF) or an everyday job after missing all of 2023 with an injury. But he also just turned 27 y/o so maybe the Reds will hand him a steady slot and reap the benefits of getting him at the right time.

It's a future pick instead of a player who had previously been picked (or signed). I don't see how one is any more fair/moral than the other.

The 'Competitive Balance' picks are awarded to lower revenue teams and are the only type of pick that can be traded. So if the Reds chose to give up the pick in lieu of another player in order to complete the deal for Lux then it's their call.

=MFS62 post_id=182260 time=1735951525 user_id=60] Los Angeles (N) has agreed to terms with utility player Hyeseong Kim on a three-year contract for $12.5 million with a two-year club option for 2028 and 2029.

Memories? Zero, none, nada!

The link is prominently displayed on the front page of BB-Ref

All is quiet, post New Year's Day

Immaculate, 22, All Mets