Frayed Knot

All is quiet, post New Year's Day

No, those were definitely not uncommon back in the day. As Irish says, 'different times'. One of the more noted examples was Don Larson's WS perfect game. Larson found out he was that day's starter in the way a lot of pitchers found out: if your mitt, rather than being in your locker, was instead sitting on your stool with a new 'game' ball in the pocket, then it was your game. A talk from your manager wasn't even part of it. Basically the whole idea of players having any sort of say in, or advance notice of, when or how often they'd play was an idea not yet standard practice. When Islander coach Al Arbour agreed to the request from his goalie tandem of Billy Smith and Glenn Resch that they always know in advance who was going to start the next game during the season, it was considered a very novel concession at the time. Koufax, btw, was still about 2-1/2 months from turning 30 in that above clip w/Scully. He'd pitch just one more season before retiring, a season consisting of 41 starts, 323 innings, and 317 Ks!. The 1.73 ERA he threw in '66 was the lowest of his career and he led the league in numbers of batters faced in both '65 & '66 All of which kind of clues you in to why he felt it necessary to hang 'em up at the age of 30.

From page one of this very thread [Feb 3rd, 2023]: "Jim Duquette, on Mets Hot Stove, suggested eight years, $240 million." And there were other similar type suggestions, although keep in mind some of them were based on the idea of signing him to a long term deal a season or two ago before he hit FA-gency and thus was younger and therefore more likely to justify a longer deal. This thread is approaching two years old at this point so the topic of Alonso's contract has been an ongoing one here, and also a bit of a moving target as conditions on the ground shift. Also, not a bad defensive player at all. Now an average-ish glove 1B-man doesn't really add a whole lot his overall value, but nor does he hurt you there. Oh, and welcome to the 'pool. I remember your brother Tony. Used to eat his cereal all the time.

It could very well end up as his final contract, even if it's one of five years or less. 1B/DH guys have to hit to keep a job so it doesn't take too much of a slip to have the phone stop ringing. Lucas Duda had a better OPS season at age 29 than did Pete [838 OPS/130 OPS+ vs 788/123 (less power but a higher OBA)] Lucas then slid the next year but was hitting even better in 2017/age 31 (879 OPS) when the Mets dealt him at mid-season. Over the next two years he'd be granted FA-gency twice and released three times all while amassing < 500 PAs for his post-NYM career. Exactly two years after the trade he played his final ML game. He was 33 Now, not saying this is a predictor of how things will go for Pete but when more one dimensional sluggers falter it sometimes goes quickly. Keeping the possibility of that type of scenario in mind was pretty much the reason for starting this thread just a couple weeks shy of two years ago.

Yeah, I don't think you have to limit it to three years less. I was mainly hoping they didn't get bluffed into five and up. I mean, it sounds odd considering that we're coming off being giddy that they just locked Soto up for the net decade and a half. And while that is a ridiculous length of time, at least he's 26 years old and a unicorn. Don't have to get crazy twice in one winter.

I'm not suggesting it's dollars per year that the Mets won't match but some combo of dollars And yearS combined. So if the Mets offer 4 x $30 he may go elsewhere for 5 x $30, or 6 x $27, or some similar set-up that the Mets will opt not match/top. And it's the $200 mil total (in whatever form) that I can't see happening no matter how much Boras wants to trumpet it.

And, as if on cue, Puma in the Post lists the ... - Giants, where a combo of Wilmer Flores and Lamont Wade Jr platooned last year. Was their (too?) heavy investment in Willy Adames a $ign of thing$ to come? - Rangers, coming off a down post-WS year but still in 'win-now' mode with deGrom, Seager, and Semien as their core. Also need to replace just-traded Nathaniel Lowe - Mariners, who have good pitching but need pop/runs and also had no set 1B-man last year - Cardinals, need to replace Goldschmidt but don't seem keen to spend a lot - Angels, who always seem to spend on 'name' players as a way to get to respectability rather than only doing so once they get there ... as potential landing spots for a hungry polar bear. https://nypost.com/2024/12/24/sports/pete-alonsos-possible-landing-spots-aside-from-mets-as-options-dwindle/

I think it's entirely possible that some team swoops in and offers Pete more $$/yrs than the Mets are willing to match. I don't have a specific team in mind but there may be one or two out there. But it's hard to see how such a team is going to have to go near $200 mil in order to pull it off.

At the same time, many of the non-NYM 1B options for Pete are being erased daily as they're filled by someone else. And then there's the internal 1B option for the Mets: Mark Vientos This option becomes less attractive and less likely, IMO, as it looks increasingly apparent that Pete isn't going to see an offer north of five years that he (and we for that matter - read some of the early posts on this thread) thought, just a year or two ago, was likely heading his way.

I'm not worried about him declining in years one or two of the deal when he'll be only 30 & 31; it's more a potential year six thru eight that's the issue. I can live with five no matter how it's structured as getting through at least year four with Pete at or near his current self is a gamble I'd be willing to take. You can always eat a year or two of a contract without compromising elsewhere. It's those multiple years that become tough to chew.

I'd offer this and be surprised if he didn't snap it up. I didn't know you had $130-$135 million to offer. Mazel Tov!

Well it's not like he's ever denied it. He's said it into microphones, written it out over social media posts, and said as much amid drunken Irishmen in a pub. But there's wanting to stay here vs possibly giving up something to do so, and he certainly should be well aware that this could be his last contract in baseball. If someone offers him six years is he going to stay here for five? ... Probably not IMO. How about if someone else goes to seven? ... Oh **** No! is my guess. He's going to get a dump truck full of money in any case. But if offered a dump truck full of money vs 1.28 dump trucks full of money* which are you taking? * essentially the difference between a five year and seven year deal at similar per year terms Now, if someone does go to six years will the Mets chase that number? ... Maybe. Will they match it if things go to seven? I highly doubt it, and I'm not sure I'd want them to. So that's basically where we stand at this point, with the always relevant 'Whatthe****doIknow' corollary in effect.

That kind of structure has appeal for both sides. Pete gets the security of a five year deal plus if he puts together a couple good seasons he has the option to go FA again when he'll still be young enough at 32 y/o to get a multi-year offer. And the Mets get to keep their power guy without having to commit to the back half of his 30s As I said earlier on this thread, I thought the Mets w/should play it as if they were willing to let Pete walk if someone else was going to go north of five years. It's starting to sound like, unless someone is hiding in the weeds waiting for their moment, that teams are reluctant to go there.

Surprised he never became a Yankee. He did. The Bronx-born Colavito played his final 39 games for the Yanx in the second half of 1968. Great all-around athlete who possessed one of the legendary throwing arms from RF. Birth name: Rocco Domenico Colavito I think he was Irish.

Vinny Nittoli lives on the road His last ML game was some months ago Maybe he'll hook on, maybe he won't ... Cherchez la Fame

Ichiro, and I'm going to ponder over King Felix and C.C. His acceptance speech will be the first time most of the baseball world will ever hear Suzuki. Reportedly his English was always better than he let on but only in close quarters. He remained a cypher to the public for his entire career.

S-A-TUR-DAY ... NIGHT! After that the script gets a little thin. I'm sure there's a lot of excellent stuff in there, but I'm certain that there's going to be a lot of playing fast and loose with the facts. Pretty much yes to both. It is kind of a fun ride even if there are no groundbreaking reveals or insights. But do I believe that everything shown actually went on in the 90 minutes leading up to air time? Oh hell no! Did Belushi have doubts about whether what he was about to get himself into was going to let him fully sprout his wings? Quite possibly. Do I think he worked it out just prior to air time out on the Rock Center skating rink? Paint me less than convinced. I suspect the bits are a combo of things that did actually happen that night mixed with the type of stuff* that typically went on back stage. And then there's the whole down-to-the-wire changes, tech issues, and cuts to be made which, while probably real, were likely exaggerated. One thing if I'm not sure of (though I'm sure some reading could catch me up) is whether this should be read as a reminder of when the program was a truly subversive exercise, and therefore a call to arms, or an attempt to sell the notion that the show still is truly subversive. It doesn't get into any of that. The movie ends as the debut shows begins. It can largely be seen as a love letter to Lorne Michaels. But he/they don't really know what they've got yet except that they wanted a show that was different from what was on TV in that era. I mean, you don't hire Michael O'Donaghue as a writer if you don't want at least some subversion in your project. But one line Michaels uses as a pitch to network affiliate reps is that it's going to be a television show by and for the first generation that grew up with television. That's going to ruffle some feathers even if it falls short of full-on subversion. Side question: How inevitable was it that the show would become just another institution that won't die despite itself? I doubt anyone at the time would have predicted a ten year run much less fifty. Second side question that's already been asked: Is the first run of Saturday Night Live cocaine's greatest accomplishment? Possibly. There was more than a bit of it going on within the cast: Ackroyd, Belushi of course, someone from Billy Preston's band hooks Garrett Morris up. And George Carlin was the guest host so, 'nuff said. * pretty much confirmed in public remarks by Lorraine Newman

And now, right on cue, comes comments from David Stearns this afternoon concerning the future of Pete as a Met: “He’s a great Met. I hope we have him back. I think we both understand this is a process and everyone’s got their own interests. Pete deserves to go out into the free-agent market and see what’s out there and then ultimately make the best choice for him and his family.” So what this implies is that the team is going to let him test the waters rather than starting the bidding themselves by making a preemptive offer. Nothing surprising there. Pete will file the day after the WS is over while the Mets monitor, as best you can in these situations, what's being offered and how they wish to counter. And while it's possible that they've already decided to let him walk and are merely saying here what they think the fans want to hear, I doubt their mind is made up one way or the other at this point. https://nypost.com/2024/10/23/sports/david-stearns-makes-mets-pete-alonso-intentions-clear/

As this past season was playing itself out I was thinking that Pete was likely costing himself money by going FA this year as opposed to signing L-T before it. That's all theoretical at this point especially since he only had one employer with which to negotiate last winter. But I suspect there might be fewer potential suitors this winter and/or that those that do kick his tires will be a bit more reluctant to bid as high or as long. Here's the chart I started this thread with nearly two years ago updated to include the past two seasons, and I doubt there's even any back of the ballot MVP votes for Pete this year. The good news for Pete is that he's not getting appreciably worse. On the other hand he's not getting any better either which implies that everyone has already seen his high water mark and that there's only one direction to move from there at a pace still to be determined. The initial comparison to Ryan Howard is no longer particularly relevant except to point out how pre-FA Pete never hit the heights of Howard, or those of other slugging corner 1Bs such as Freddie, Miggy, Albert, Votto, Goldschmidt etc. [avg age 29 OPS+ = 154.5] [td]AGE[/td][td]Ryan Howard[/td][td]OPS+[/td][td]Pete Alsonso[/td][td]OPS+[/td][td]24[/td][td]39 ABs[/td][td]122[/td][td]ROY-1, MVP-7[/td][td]147[/td][td]25[/td][td]88 G, ROY-1[/td][td]133[/td][td]Covid Season[/td][td]122[/td][td]26[/td][td]MVP-1[/td][td]167[/td][td][/td][td]133[/td][td]27[/td][td]MVP-5[/td][td]145[/td][td]MVP-8[/td][td]146[/td][td]28[/td][td]MVP-2[/td][td]125[/td][td]MVP-17[/td][td]123[/td][td]29[/td][td]MVP-3[/td][td]141[/td][td]-----[/td][td]123[/td][td]30[/td][td]MVP-10[/td][td]127[/td][td]-----[/td][td]---[/td][td]31[/td][td]MVP-10[/td][td]126[/td][td]-----[/td][td]---[/td][td]32[/td][td]71 G[/td][td]91[/td][td]-----[/td][td]---[/td][td]33[/td][td]80 G[/td][td]115[/td][td]-----[/td][td]---[/td][td]34[/td][td]153 G[/td][td]92[/td][td]-----[/td][td]---[/td][td]35[/td][td]129 G[/td][td]96[/td][td]-----[/td][td]---[/td][td]36[/td][td]112 G[/td][td]85[/td][td]-----[/td][td]---[/td]

A look at the 90 minutes leading up to the 90 minute live debut of an experimental TV show now known as SNL, October 1, 1975 Hijinx, low budgets, unknown talent, skeptical network execs, uptight network censors, egos, jealousies, and doubt all ensue ... along with some drugs. Spoiler alert: They pull it off.

Tiant used to smoke post-game cigars (including in the shower) that were big enough for someone to hit .300 with.

Well then, that all makes this winter quite the conundrum, doesn't it?

Oh I know perfectly well Why they do it. I just refuse to participate.

I tend to avoid sequels almost entirely. If I didn't like the original then I'm not going to want to see the story continued. And if I did like the original I'm afraid that a bad or simply lesser version set the original back a peg or two. There's got to be some reason to make a sequel other than: 'We made a boat-load of cash on the first one so now we're back for a second boat'

Sometimes I think these long-delayed sequels come down to hitting a window where several of the principles simultaneously find themselves devoid of the kind of offers the way they used to get until they finally break and say, 'All right, I'll do it ... just give me the check!'