Frayed Knot

Yes, there is a limit on coaches; or, more accurately, on the number of uniformed coaches who can be in the dugout during game time.

There were two seperate plays, def in the same series, maybe even in the same game. - in one, Zeile the baserunner ran into 2nd baseman Knoblauch as he was waiting on a grounder and was (correctly) called out for interfering* with the fielder making a play - in the other, Knoblauch the baserunner had to slightly dip one shoulder to avoid a stationary Zeile while rounding 1st on a hit. CK continued on towards 2nd and was thrown out by about 15 feet. Mazzilli's complaints absolutely goaded the replacement ump at 1st into calling 'obstruction' on Zeile and awarded Knoblauch 2nd base ... a horrible call! We've seen that call called the way it should be at least twice this year; - in Game 1 of the WS, Scott Rolen rounding 3rd ran straight into Tiger 3B Brandon Inge as Inge was steaming over his mis-throw. The umps there correctly indicate the obstruction* but don't call it until after the play is over. If said runner is safe anyway there's no call to make. If he's out it's a judgement call as to whether on not the obstruction caused him to be out. - Wright was also called safe at home on a near identical play earlier this season during a game I was at. Knoblauch, in that case, barely had to alter his stride while running to the point where it couldn't possibly have made the difference in the call at 2nd. * Obstruction, btw, is what is called on a fielder who is in the basepaths w/o the ball or making a play. 'Interference' is what's called a a baserunner who runs into a fielder in the process of mkaing the play. It's basically semantics but that's hwo the rulebook defines them.

Franco, btw, is on the trip as a coach for this upcoming US/Japan series. I don't think it's inconceivable that he finishes (or maybe even begins) next season as one depending on how he looks as 2007 moves along.

]I just figured our own FK could list our current top 30-50 prospects off the top of his head. Hell no, I don't even pretend to be an expert on this sort of stuff. I'll be shakey after 4 or 5. Pelfrey & Humber didn't play enough to ruin their 'prospect' status so they'll be at/near the top but I don't think Milledge is still eligible, meaning that the remaining names are going to be mostly lower-level "potential" guys, but no one real polished or all that close to the show. No use subscribing to BA is all you want is the basic list - although coughing up the 3-4 bucks for that one issue just to get the quickie write-ups on the top 10 guys isn't a bad idea.

="Vic Sage"]Knot, I'm speaking to you! Didn't realize I was the authority on this sort of thing. Baseball America will start their annual take on each team probably starting in the next week or two. They'll release their review of a new team every few days at their website (or one division at a time via their bi-monthly newsstand magazine) between early November and around February or so -- meaning that their NYM list could be as soon as next week or not for a few months yet depending on which order they choose. A non-subscriber will get access to some info via the site but blocked out of others (like you'll get their top-10 list but not individual scouting reports). If you want the write-ups find a newsstand and buy the one issue where they scout the NL East. If top-10 isn't enough for you they sell a handbook where they go 30-deep in each system. John Sickels is also considered an authoritative view on this sort of thing and will do a similar review for minorleaguebaseball.com at some point over the winter. If you want something NOW!!!! a little internet searching will probably turn up various lists with some Met fan's opinion of the minor league world. Whether his/her opinion is worth anything is anyone's guess. Any list still left over from last year will be so out of date at this time as to be virtually worthless.

Either way, Cards fans can take in the fact that they either [u:531e0db64f]were[/u:531e0db64f] the worst WS winner of all time, or [u:531e0db64f]they lost to[/u:531e0db64f] the worst ever.

Insisting on DHs is the same as shortening the season in many ways; it's telling the owners they now have fewer dates to sell. It ain't gonna fly. The reason DHs existed in the first place is that the 2-for-1 offer was a necessary attraction to customers and the extra days off were needed for travel. Clearly they don't need the travel dates in this post-train era and stadiums are playing to a much larger pct of capacity these days in virtually every city and every season. The incentives just aren't there. On yeah, and DHs aren't going to be over in 4-1/2 hours any more. More like 6-1/2.

- The reason you don't want the WC playing the champ from its own division is that it creates the situation where a team proves over a 162 game sked that they're the better team ... and then is asked to go prove it all over again in a best-of-5. That's telling folks that the reg season doesn't mean so much fromt he sport that has managed to maintain the most integrity for its reg season. At least this way you're forcing the WC team to go beat someone else first before earning a 2nd chance at dethroning the winner. As long as the current set-up remains the same so should this 1st round exemption. And while we're at it, I'm against trying to messing w/the home-field stuff in the 1st round simply to make it tougher for the WC team to advance. Fans are overwhelmingly in favor of having a WC team in the playoffs but then seem to want to rig the format so they won't advance. If you're not willing to keep them out entirely, IMO, then you've got to treat them as equals once they're there. - On the other hand, I'd be in favor of inputting the double-WC/1-game play-in format which treats the WC team(s) as lesser entrant by making them go through an additional (1-game) round. It also would lessen the need for the in-divison 1st-round ban (cuz it wouldn't really be a 1st round anymore) and also greatly increases the advantage not only of being a div winner instead of a WC but also in having the best record among the div winners as now the best-of-the-best gets the weakened play-in survivor in the first round. Final week tussles for best overall record among teams w/a spot already locked up also take on more meaning. - I'm against lengthening the 1st round. Sometimes less is more (they're having trouble selling out all the 'inventory' they've got now) plus they're dodging weather bullets as it is. One of these days Colorado's going to win and advance and then ... (2 feet of snow the other day while the WS was going on) - They'll change the starting times for games when MLB (or any of the other leagues for that matter) agree to take less money for selling their product. The games start at 8:00-something Eastern because they attract the most viewers at that hour. As it is the spike in viewership is in those post-10PM/11PM hours, exactly the ones an earlier time would eliminate.

The other thing that got a few questioning Willie's story about his & future wifey's first date was that, after being confronted by a few press-types w/the small inaccuracies in the story, he insisted that his memory was correct and it must be their "facts" which were off ... 'That's my story and I'm a-stickin' to it'! One suspects that Willie is probably none too hip to the magic of 'Retrosheet' and the like.

btw, it was Ralph's birthday Friday

Big difference between a nickname and a joke. One encourages repeated usage virtually by definition while the other discourages it for the same reason.

What was 'Sportsman's Park' for the longest time was re-named Busch Stadium at some point after the A-B people bought the team in the early '50s or so. The replacement was new for the '66 season and was either Busch I or Busch II depending on your POV, making this one either II or III. Not sure which version prevails 'mongst the locals.

The only problem with that line was that Ralph saw fit to use it virtually every time the Mets played the Phillies. And while it may have been amusing the first 147 times ...

SteveJRogers wrote: Has anyone confirmed that David Eckstein is a Jewish ballplayer or is it like Mike Jacobs/David Cone where the name/spelling sounds jewish but the person isn't? David Eckstein: NOT the subject of any Adam Sandler songs ]Well I recall the 1923 Yankees. Like it was yesterday. The Cards also did it in 1967. Busch II opened in 1966. The '23 Yanx were the last team to christen a new park with a title.

Nymr83 wrote: well i wanted to try and grade everyone's individual season first Nothing wrong with doing that too. Doing the one might even help you with the other. I was also using this as an excuse to make sure everyone saw the other thread since it's currently hiding in one of the infrequently used sub-forum.

Well, those were the Tigers I had been complaining about all season. Every time I saw them they were stinking up the joint with undisciplined hitting & pitching and shakey defense ... and they continued that right up until the moment they won 7 straight vs the Yanx & A's and suddenly looked unbeatable. They weren't.

Pudge has never been a discliplined-type hitter. He's just usually good enough to get away with it. Not this week. Took a pair of brass ones for Polanco to take that 3-2 pitch!!

]Did I miss any errors? Several, including more from Detroit pitchers.

Rather than grade them, head over to the 'Rankings Forum' and help rank them!

]So he's what, about 5-10 feet taller than all the other pitchers? Only 3 feet taller actually, but his arms are like 7 longer than the average man!! Makes it tough to buy shirts.

Yeah, it just that he wasn't supposed to be a 4th outfielder. And basically that post was just my long-winded way of saying that fans need to learn to treat each "propsect" differently. There's no reason to assume that player 'X' is going to fail because years ago 'Y' didn't meet up to someone else's idea (and maybe not an informed opinion at that) of what he "should have" become, and that the "can't miss" guys of yesteryear maybe never should have been stamped that way in the first place.

soupcan wrote: I don't think being on a vagina diet would be such a horrible thing. Exhibit A, your honor, in; 'Posts that shouldn't start off a new page'

Back in the olden days, those pre-historic times before the internet, talk radio, fan message boards, and before things like Baseball America or other rotisserie-aimed web sites were analyzing prospects to within an inch of their lives by the time they're barely out of their teens, about all a standard fan had to go on as far as the future of minor leaguers was the spin coming out of the team's pr dept. The Mets were absolutely guily of revving up the hype machine during the 'Gen-K' days. Since then, if anything, I think they've been overly-cautious to go exactly the other way. David West was a guy who had his rep somewhat articfically puffed up (something the Mets later admitted to) mostly for trade purposes. Back in those pre-'Moneyball' days when the dreams of scouts still prevailed, there was no shortage of people - both fans and those within the business - who were willing to bet on the future of a 6'-6" LHP with "stuff". I don't know now, and certainly didn't know then, to what degree West was actually 'dominating' in the minors and how much was merely hope. Ochoa - He was highly touted in the Bal'mer system at the time of the trade (I remember Gammons raving over him) and was also considered close to being ready. Everyone remembers the "5-tool" comments - although, in fairness, they did say; 'four, with the potential for the 5th' power) developing as time went on. That he never went on to hit at the ML level (he could always run, throw & field) is what doomed his career. Good thing we insisted on him in the Bonilla deal instead of that Benitez kid the Orioles were trying to pawn off on us, huh? Escobar - The classic case of putting too much stock in success at a lower level. Escobar, unlike say West, did grow up in the era where monor leaguers were closely tracked by outsiders. The problem with him was that everyone - in a rush to claim that they were touting him first - went overboard in declaring him the next great thing after his "breakout" season in Low-A ball! He then came up with a back injury which knocked him out for over a year and never really dominated the way he had that one season. Problem is, that 'Next Great Thing' label hung in people's minds to the point where they acted as if deceived when he didn't set the world on fire. Had they really been paying attention, they shouldn't have been. Fernando Martinez right now is in a similar place to where Escobar was when everyone jumped on his bandwagon: Exciting and promising, just wait for a bit more success up the ladder before you start penciling him in to your '08, '09, or '10 lineups.

In the beginning waves could be fun [u:45c5d6bdbc]IF[/u:45c5d6bdbc] (and this is the biggie) they were started at the right time. It's one thing to be killing time during lulls in games or concerts. But those mindlessly trying to start one while they should be paying attention to the game deserve to have their project weakly peter out and die an embarrassing death.

BA looks at some Arizona-based Mets: Mets righthander Mike Pelfrey is currently having an awakening of sorts in the Arizona Fall League. The book on Pelfrey for much of his first full season, after signing late as New York’s first-rounder (and ninth overall) in 2005, was big fastball velocity and command, with below-average secondary pitches. Pelfrey has made strides--along with some alterations--with his offspeed stuff over the last three weeks. He scrapped his hard curveball for the equivalent of a slider. It's a sharp, late-breaking offering that has shown flashes of having good depth and tilt. "You can see he struggles with it at times," a scout from an American League club said, "but when he stays on top of it and stays easy in his arm action, it has the makings of a plus pitch." It's something Pelfrey needed, but with his fastball in the mid-to-upper 90s, adding an 85-87 mph slider is only half the battle. He didn't have good command of his changeup for much of 2006 either, but has worked extensively on controlling his arm speed and tinkered with his grip slightly to have an effective third pitch--especially against lefthanded hitters. "I quit throwing the curveball and picked up on this slider a little while back, and I think it's right where it needs to be right now," Pelfrey said. "I think it's going to complement my style a little bit better and be a good pitch for me once I get more consistent with it. "With the changeup, I'm starting to command it a little bit better and it has some sink on the end. I think I just got more comfortable with the grip we're using now and I'm throwing it more than I had in the past, so the confidence is starting to get there too." Pelfrey went a combined 7-3, 2.43 with 109 strikeouts in 96 innings between high Class A St. Lucie, Double-A Binghamton and Triple-A Norfolk, with a brief promotion to New York mixed in. In the AFL, the 6-foot-7 righthander has allowed one hit in four innings, facing a total of 13 batters for Mesa. "It’s 60-feet, six inches for everybody else, but for Pelfrey it's more like 50 feet--total," Solar Sox righthander Kevin Slowey (Twins) said. "He gets such good extension, he's very free and easy and the ball just explodes out of his hand. And with that height advantage, the ball's on top of hitters a heck of a lot quicker than a lot of other guys out here. Add in that velocity and he's dirty . . . just plain filthy." Pelfrey dominated the Florida State League in 2006, but allowed 13 runs in his first five starts at Double-A. So the Mets brought in veteran catcher Mike DeFelice to Binghamton to give their prized prospect some kind of comfort level. With DeFelice behind the plate, Pelfrey went on a tear, reeling off 3-1, 2.32 numbers with 35 strikeouts in 31 innings in June. "I even told the Mets that he was the one who turned my season around," Pelfrey said. "He was just a guy I felt like I could talk to--someone who's been (in the big leagues), somebody who's had that experience. He taught me more about attacking hitters in mixing in my breaking ball and make it more useable, because honestly it's never been great. But he put me in situations where I could use it and have success and gain confidence in myself. He was a big reason I was able to do what I did." Pelfrey has plenty of aggressiveness and nasty pure stuff, but he knows keeping hitters off the pace of his fastball is what it takes to have any kind of success at the next level. "I just have to keep using the slider and the changeup to where I'm comfortable throwing either one at any time and know I can command and locate it where I want it," Pelfrey said. "I'm happy with where things are right now, but I know I still have a lot of work to do to get them where they need to be." MULLING MULVEY: The Mets didn't have a first-round pick in the 2006 draft, selecting Villanova righthander Kevin Mulvey as their top choice in the second round. So far, Mulvey been holding his own. The New Jersey native jumped to Double-A in his debut where he went 0-1, 1.35 in 13 innings. Mulvey has been just as impressive in the AFL, despite allowing five runs over his eight innings of work. "He's got good command of three pitches," a scout from an American League club said. "Good velocity on the fastball--90-93 (mph)--and a nice mix of secondary pitches with a pretty darned good feel for his changeup." Mulvey was a 34th-round pick of the Cardinals out of high school but opted to head to Villanova, and the move paid off after three seasons as he emerged as a second-round talent. The Phillies were heavily linked to Mulvey heading into the draft, but he wound up going to his favorite team--and the team his parents were watching while his mother Carole was going through labor. "I just found this out recently, but apparently they were watching the Mets-Cubs game on TV in the hospital," Mulvey said. "All I know is Doc Gooden was pitching, so it makes everything that’s happened a little more special." MUY CALIENTE, FERNANDO: Mets outfielder Fernando Martinez is the youngest player in the history of the AFL, turning 18 on the Fall League's Opening Day, but even facing players five to six years older, Martinez has shown tools worthy of his $1.4 million bonus. Martinez is hitting just .233 (10-for-43) for Mesa, but that includes a 1-for-18 start. He has shown excellent bat speed, instincts and the ability to use the whole field in a prospect-laden showcase. "He's still so young, but the ball just jumps off his bat," Solar Sox manager Pat Listach said. "He's a tough kid with tremendous natural ability. He's hit some balls I'm just amazed by, to be honest. The first day of batting practice, he's out there hitting opposite-field home runs. I know it's BP, but for a 17-year-old to be out there taking balls out the other way, it's just very impressive." Martinez was expected to play all three outfield spots in Arizona, but has played exclusively center for Mesa. And while the tools are there offensively, his defense is still a work in progress. "He still needs some time on routes, jumps, those types of things that will only get better with more experience," Listach said. "This is a real test for him and he's responded."