Frayed Knot

I wish I could say that dodging a bases-loaded/no-out situation was sure to be inspiring ... but I don't believe a word of it.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: They're really not making good use of their baserunners. They get so few that they're not sure what is the proper way to proceed.

I kind of had to chuckle at reading that they played off some of their hockey correspondents ... I didn't know they had any. But at least they'll have Rex Ryan this fall so I'm sure that'll keep the masses tuned in.

This season has been bad even by Granderson's usual standard of bad Aprils 2017: .195/.239/.292 // 434 2016: .241/.347/.471 // 818 2015: .231/.362/.321 // 682

HahnSolo wrote: Two idiots who yell a lot. Fits right in with ESPN's programming model. I once heard that type of show described as 'Facts vs Volume', which is just plain perfect.

Tebow was 3/4 yesterday and is 9 for his last 20 to bring his season line up to .246/.310/.415 Still lots of Ks (16) vs only 4 walks, but also 6 XBH among his 16 hits (3 doubles, 1 triple and 2 HRs) Not exactly promotion material and still a small sample size (71 PA -- 65 AB) but those calling him the worst baseball player in the western hemisphere (or words to that effect) were doing so based on brief observations and on sample sizes a lot smaller than that.

Maybe I just don't tune in enough to hear political talk on the Four-Letter network, that was the one part of that piece that I didn't really get. I mean, sure they go all politically correct on issues (although who in the media doesn't?) and the corporate part of the empire probably swung too far in the other direction in trying to make up for the frat-house antics of their early days -- like the tennis announcer who recently got canned for saying Serena employed 'guerilla' tactics in her match because it sounded too much like he was calling her a 'gorilla' and therefore must be a card-carrying racist. But the obvious biggest problem is the rights fees. They pay more money to the NFL than any other network even though they just get the one game per week -- and often the bottom of the barrel game at that -- because what they're really paying for is the rights to game films that they can then spend 12 hours per day dissecting on their regular weekday shows. Except how many unemployed sports fans must there be to goose up the ratings for mid- week/mid-day programming to make that strategy work? And they've just like tripled the amount of money they'll be shoveling to the NBA in a contract that I'm not even sure has begun yet even though the good teams pretty much clinch playoff spots by Thanksgiving, the shitty teams are eliminated by Christmas and now openly admit that they're trying to suck, and there's only so many times you can show LeBron and Curry on your national telecast even while you're hoping that their coach won't go all wholesale 'resting' of his starting lineup. It's like they've taken a page from the three-letter network playbook where overpaying for sports is considered OK because it's good for the network's prestige and visibility and so you'll wind up making it up the difference in ratings elsewhere. But a business model where you lose money buying sports doesn't seem like a good idea when you're a network that exists only to show sports.

Syndergaard wasn't pushed back, he just wasn't pushed up the way they announced initially. It was always Gsellman's turn in the rotation. Put another way, Gsellman was either going to go tonight or sometime this weekend vs the Nationals. Take your pick.

Yup. This passage in particular -- The near-universal sentiment of former ESPN addicts I’ve spoken to is that the content provider sidelined actual sports in favor of carnival barkers. Sure, you clicked over to ESPN to watch sports, but what you’re actually going to get are “Crossfire”-esque segments of non-athletes making dumb arguments about topics you don’t care about. -- mirrors what I've been saying about the Sunday Night Baseball package for a while now; that while you may be under the impression that you've tuned in to watch a baseball game, they're downright positive that you tuned in to see how ESPN presents a baseball game and at all the bells, whistles, gimmicks, and promos they can tack on to it. And if it comes down to showing the gimmicks vs showing the game, well shit, that's an obvious choice for them even if not quite so obvious to you or me.

Whew! For a moment there I thought Granderson was going to get a hit.

Gsellman faced 26 hitters before being yanked, he retired 11 of them of K'd just 2

That was the 14th Mets AB with bases loaded this season: Prior to tonight they were 3 for 10 plus 2 walks, for a total of 12 runs Met pitchers, on the other hand, have already faced bases-loaded situations [u:2i4l6y14]29 times[/u:2i4l6y14] (before today) allowing 3 walks, 9 hits including 3 Grand Slams, and one Sac Fly for 24 runs total. And now you can tack-on another bases-clearing double to the above.

Pretty depressing being 5 runs down before ever coming to bat ... particularly since I don't think we've ever scored 5 runs off of Teheran. And this of course comes on the heels of being 4 runs down to Scherzer before ever coming to bat. Not exactly a formula for success.

Oh I agree, I just found it strange how, in addition to the usual suspects of Hollywood and Washington, the gossip mongerers, even those not normally concerned with sports, suddenly had their crosshairs trained on the backroom machinations from Bristol Freakin' Connecticut.

One thing I've noticed over the last, oh maybe six months or so, is that ESPN-related gossip has become a major staple of websites. And it goes beyond just the speculation of these impending layoffs, which has more to do with cord-cutters cutting into their seemingly ever-upward pointing profit margins, but including also stories of personal feuds and intra-office sniping, or the two-way trash talk involving those who recently left on their own, etc. The locals papers have long done that sort of stuff with WFAN (particularly if it involved Russo and/or Francesa) but dishing on the behind the scenes from Bristol, CT was unheard of until recently at which point it suddenly seemed like it was all over the place.

A couple of Cubs pitchers apparently had some stuff to say which, unless you've got something to back it up, is probably better left unsaid. I liked Thames's reaction to those comments and to being tested twice already this season with the prospect of more to come; "I've got plenty of urine and blood"

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: That guy looks tiny but powerful. A more compact Rennie Stennett. Listed at 5' 8" / 200 Sounds like he can pack a punch. The Pirates, long acknowledged to be the first team to go heavily into the Caribbean under super scout Howie Haak, now turn over the first even African and the first born & raised Lithuanian in the same week. Weren't they the ones who also went after those Indian cricket players a few years back? Never did see that Disney-fied movie version of that story.

Eric Thames, the Californian via Korea sensation for the Brewers, merely singled in Milwaukee's 5-run 1st inning this afternoon so he remains 'stuck' on 11 HRs 22 games into the season. The only downside to his start is that 8 of the 11 taters have come vs the Cincy Reds pitching staff. And in addition to the powah, he's 'slashing' a tidy .371/.482/.929 coming in to today's game.

I also like that the umps didn't buy Molina's post-play argument of; "But I tagged him with one of my neck tattoos as he went by!!"

Not a make-up of the wash-out but the regularly scheduled game for this date. Gsellman gets bumped and so Harvey will start in his regular spot. Atlanta keeps their rotation and simply slides everyone back a day, so Julio Teheran will go tonight with Dickey on Thursday vs Syndergaard. We will then wind up missing Colon this time around.

Atlanta celebrates the reunion of the d'Arnaud brothers by DFA'ing Chase. His replacement will be Lane Adams, a 27 y/o OF with 3,000 minor league ABs and 3 ML ones back in 2014 with the Royals

I guess it's only fair that Jeter get a chance to own the Marlins. After all, the Marlins owned his Yanquis in the 2003 World Series.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Rescheduling for late September seems an odd choice. It may be a game that doesn't matter; the Mets may be either in or out of the postseason by then, but if it's a frenetic race for a playoff berth, that doubleheader may put them at a bit of a disadvantage. At least it will be after rosters expand, and they'll have a 28-man bullpen. Weird situation with a division opponent having their three road trips in April, April, and then not again until the final week of the season. Can't really schedule a DH for Wednesday with Thurs being a day game. Don't want to double up on Thursday because it's a get-away day for Atlanta. So that leaves giving up a day off (assuming they could find a mutual one) or waiting until late September and, if I were a player, I'd probably be pretty protective of my off-days too. I was wondering if anyone considered using ASG Thursday as a kind of universal make-up day? But I figure that the union wanted that four-day break rather than three so the players probably consider that to be off-limits. Starting next year the season is going to be three days longer -- same number of games but 'spread out' across 185 days instead of 182 -- so perhaps rescheduling on a mutual off day gets easier.

The Bush/Jeter effort is in fact the winning group to negotiate for buying the Marlins. Price and details and such still to be worked out.

Game off! Make up sked as a 4:00 DH in that final series in September 25th (shows ya what I know!!) Syndergaard and Harvey to stay in their sked Wed & Thurs slots, so Gsellman gets skipped this turn.