Frayed Knot

=kcmets post_id=22765 time=1569372276 user_id=53] I can't believe we're on the hook with Lowrie for another year at $10 mil.

=kcmets post_id=22765 time=1569372276 user_id=53] I can't believe we're on the hook with Lowrie for another year at $10 mil.

And apparently the Marlins' strategy is to never actually hit a ball to a fielder. That one seems to be working a bit better.

So apparently the strategy is to put the leadoff guy on 2nd base (one way or the other) in each inning. Not sure that's the best winning formula.

So as per the guys' discussion: Would your balance suffer more if you had only your big toe removed, or if you kept the big one only while the other four were removed? I think this merits further investigation before we decide whether the adjective 'Great' belongs in place of 'Big' when discussing said toe.

Not to belabor the Koosman story (it just happened to be on my mind) but how many times do you think Kooz got taken out of the park to the opposite side by a middle infielder? (as Syndergaard just was) My guess is that he didn't have to take off his mitt to count them.

btw, if you vote in this poll please tack on a post indicating that you voted. You can, though certainly don't have to, reveal HOW you voted but, with the options varying between one and thirteen, it would help to know the number of voters in addition to the total number of votes so as to determine where we collectively stand on the 'Big Hall/Little Hall' question.

=G-Fafif post_id=22736 time=1569361055 user_id=55] I'm not sure who exactly composes the Hall of Fame committee that J. Wilpon said made this decision, but I assume it still includes Gary and Howie (who were on the previous iteration) and Jay (the alumni affairs macher). I have faith in their judgment where this sort of thing is concerned (and in Howie and Gary where any Met thing is concerned).

Vote for as many or as few as you want, but if you want no one then vote 'None' so it will qualify as a vote registered and not just a choice ignored. For right now I'm sticking to retired (or least no longer playing) guys. We can have deGrom/Alonso discussions at another time.

Just because there are no rules doesn't mean there shouldn't be standards. Not concrete ones maybe, but some kind of threshold which keeps from giving into ceremony whims and/or fan demands that more numbers be retired for the purpose of having more retired numbers. [speculation] As for why Kooz and not Wright: I suspect they're going chronologically during this new era of past player relationship mending meaning Kooz is perhaps just the first step on the way to Tug who will lead them into the Keith/Gary/Dwight/Darryl era (and can they really honor all them while ignoring Ronnie?!?). The ceremony du annum then leads to Franco & Fonzie, then Beltran (Ceetar will lead the charge!!) on the way to Wright & Reyes. And by then deGrom will be retired ...

Just because there are no rules doesn't mean there shouldn't be standards. Not concrete ones maybe, but some kind of threshold which keeps from giving into ceremony whims and/or fan demands that more numbers be retired for the purpose of having more retired numbers. [speculation] As for why Kooz and not Wright: I suspect they're going chronologically during this new era of past player relationship mending meaning Kooz is perhaps just the first step on the way to Tug who will lead them into the Keith/Gary/Dwight/Darryl era (and can they really honor all them while ignoring Ronnie?!?). The ceremony du annum then leads to Franco & Fonzie, then Beltran (Ceetar will lead the charge!!) on the way to Wright & Reyes. And by then deGrom will be retired ...

So, as you likely said sometime around 8th grade algebra, mathematics is definitely not our friend these days. The Nats just won the 1st game of today's DH vs Philly which, in addition to last night's win, eliminates Philly from any & all post-season possibilities. But, hey, at least they saved Aaron Nola for the night-cap!?!?! But this just about cooks our goose as well. We're now 6.0 games behind the Nats & 5.0 behind the Brewers, and 1.0 in back of the Cubs (all have six games remaining) -- all of which means we need to run the table AND ... -- have the Nats lose out in which case we'd tie them for a WC play-in scenario -- have the Brewers lose out in which case we'd finish one game ahead, or go 1-5 in which case we'd tie them -- hope the Cubs lose at least once (to tie with them) or more than once which would eliminate them And the only possibility where we AREN'T required to go 6-0 would be going 5-1 while Milwaukee loses out and the Cubs lose at least twice. So, yeah, I'm saying there's a chance.

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Who the hell was clamoring for this? The Committee for the Advancement of Ceremonies

But wait, there's more!!

So, Liverpool looks pretty tough to beat this year.

NYM bats are really good tonight at spreading their baserunners (7) around just thin enough to avoid scoring any runs. Also at pop-ups.

The Cubs, btw, not only got swept four straight by the hated Cardinals, but did so by losing each of the four games by one run, one of them in 10 innings. Ya think THAT might be a cause for 'What-iffing' yourself to death all winter? It also might 'What-if' Joe Maddon right out of a job.

Been paying so much attention to our (fading) chances in the NL race that it's easy to lose track of the fact that there's a fun, if somewhat simpler, 3-for-2 race in the AL. Conceding tonight's game to Cleveland a few minutes early (10-1, top 9) this will put them in an exact tie with TBR for the 2nd WC slot, both teams sitting 2.0 games behind WC leader Oakland OAK (94-62): 2 @ LAA; 4 @ SEA TBR (92-64): 1 vs Red Sox; 2 vs NYY; 3 @ TOR CLE (92-64): 3 @ CHW; 3 @ WAS Seems like play-in games just to get to the WC play-in game is quite possible (if not likely) in either or both leagues. The other AL race is for overall best record and therefore the right to meet the WC survivor in the 1st round of games. The Yanx (102-55) & Astros (102-54) are in a near dead heat with Houston, by way of their 4-3 in-season record, holding the main tie-breaker. Minnesota is locked into the #3 seed so would meet whoever 'loses' this race, although given their history vs the Yanx (particularly October history), I'm not sure they wouldn't prefer the supposedly "better" team if it's the Astros.

And those Marlins sweeps are now forcing us to NEED our own four-game Marlins sweep. OK, so now instead of needing to go 8-0 we only have to go 7-0 (piece o' cake, right?) and have ONE of the following occur ... - the Nats go no better than 3-5 - the Brewers go no better than 2-4 PLUS - the Cubs (6 games remaining), Phils (9), and DBags (6) all need to all lose at least once Still tough, but a bit easier than it was four hours ago.

Howie presents the tragic number at 4. Any combo of Brewcrew wins and Mets losses sticks a fork in it all. And now it's three w/the Brews winning today - although at least for once Pitt didn't lose by a blowout (4-3). But that alone can't 'stick the fork in'. Remember we "only" have to catch two of the three ahead of us, not all of them. Still tough, but not impossible and we cut a game off both the Nats & Cubs lead this afternoon. Just 1/2 game in back of the Cubs now.

The Mets have been playing good ball for the most part as of late [8-4] ... But it ain't easy gaining ground on a team that ain't losing any games. Eight and four is good, but they put themselves in a position where they had to be great and/or hope for train wrecks by others and neither has happened. So while that stretch (following the 9/7 & 9/8 weekend losses to Philly) has netted the Mets three games vs both the Cubs & DBacks*, they've gained just one game on the Nats and the Cards, 1.5 on Philly, and have lost two full games to Milwaukee. aka: TLTL * Thx to the four-game sweep, meaning that we've actually lost a game to them otherwise.

Can someone get a message to the top three hitters and suggest that maybe they NOT go 0-fer-10 with 4 Ks and leave a ton of runners on base today? Maybe CF can pass a note to Alonso's parents during breakfast at the hotel.

We also need one more win to clinch a .500 season; two or more wins over the final eight puts us in the black. Or we could just tank the entire week in order to secure that all-important (14th?) draft pick next June. No telling how much that will benefit us in the 2025 season over getting say the 17th or 18th pick.

I said 12 games ago (quoting Gary) that the Mets likely needed to lose no more than four games (go 16-4) in order to push this season past next Sunday. Well, they lost four games since then (8-4) meaning we're in a pickle (just in case you didn't already know that). So they basically need to run the table -- win vs Cincy on Sunday, then 4-0 from Miami, then 3-0 vs Atlanta -- and end up 88-74 in order to TIE for a Wild Card slot If Two or More of the following also happen ... - the Nats (7-5 over their last 12) go no better than 3-6 over their remaining nine games: 1 @ Miami; 5 at home vs Phils (DH on Tuesday); 3 hosting Indians - the Brewers (10-2) go no better than 3-4: 1 more walkover against Pirates; (off Monday); 3 at Cincy; 3 at Colorado - the Cubs (5-7) go no better than 6-1: final game at Wrigley vs Cards; (off Monday); 3 at Pittsburgh; 3 at St Louis We can also technically tie with the Cards by winning out while they lose out, but that would automatically give the Cubs four wins and the DBacks three so that kinda makes it not worth considering. And obviously if we go a mere 7-1 this week then all of the above numbers get bumped up by one and so on, but losing even one game also brings both the Phils and Diamondbacks into the mix. We're currently even in the loss column with Philly so we already need their losses going forward to surpass ours in order to keep them from gumming up the works (making rooting for them to sweep five vs the Nats a bit tricky) and we're one loss ahead of the Snakes. The Phils have nine games remaining: The ESPN Sunday Night game at Cleveland, 5 at Washington, 3 hosting the Marlins DBacks (7): today in San Diego, then home for 3 vs Cards, 3 vs Padres So, uhh, yeah. The odds here would certainly have been a lot better had the Brewers fallen into a hole like they were supposed to following the Yelich injury instead of somehow catching fire. Not having the Marlins, Padres, Pirates, Reds, and Rox on their schedule coming down the stretch would have been a help as well.

One of the biggest problems is having to rely on help from the Pirates down the stretch. They've now not only lost seven straight but are being out-scored 73-22 over that time! And those numbers don't even include tonight's game which they're currently losing as well. And after they finish up this set with the Brewers they have three with the Cubs starting on Tuesday.