Frayed Knot

Ashie62 wrote: You could trade Harvey. Maybe for a Maserati !?!

Although I think the worst thing MLB could do on this topic would be to hang a 'Mission Accomplished' banner over their 6 minute decrease so I certainly don't have a problem with at least entertaining suggestions that might chop off another couple of minutes and Manfred is giving the opinion that this is a major cause of his. Not that that means he's scanning the papers for every proposal by the ink-stained wretches across the country but yaneverknow.

[fimg=400:2dp2wxef]https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/021516metsspringtraining004acny.jpg?quality=100&strip=all&w=664&h=441&crop=1[/fimg:2dp2wxef] I still think that's better than the Cadillac Escalade he pulled up in a few years ago (particularly for a 23 y/o or whatever he was as a rookie).

[fimg=500:3iott5ud]http://www.writtalin.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/big-lebowski-1.jpg[/fimg:3iott5ud] SHUT THE FUCK UP DONNY YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT!

One simple fix is that the manager/coach cannot leave the dugout to talk to the pitcher without removing the pitcher. No more freebie just to chat. Or, as Sherman is suggesting, you can go out there to chat but because you only get so many opportunities to stop the action -- including your replay challenges, any defensive conferences, etc. -- each mound visit you do make better be used wisely. And that goes for your catcher too. Shit, Posada would have used up the Yanqui timeout allotments by the second inning in most games. college basketball games are about 2 hours Yeah, an hour 40 minutes for the first 37 minutes of the game and then another half-hour for the final three. Again, it's the pace rather than just the raw length. The problem is that the exact same baseball game takes some 20-30 minutes longer than it did, not 100 years ago but more like 20 or 30. It's one thing if it's added time but it's another if all that added time is nothing but dead time. Nothing wrong on the surface with a three hour baseball game. It's the 3 hour average baseball game that I object to. Is baseball still too slow or is Joel Sherman just committed to that notion I mean, it's an opinion, but I think it's a widely held one and one to which I subscribe. As he notes in the linked article to that linked article, MLB chopped off 6 minutes off games from 2014 to 2015, but that's partly only because it had hit a record 3:02 and even in the improvement last year they were backsliding as the year went on. Games in the first half were down to 2:53 but up to 2:59 after the ASB.

I notice the use of "hijinks" runs in the family. Eh, more just an all-purpose CPF film review tradition. The one thing I heard a longtime journo say that did NOT ring true to him about this movie was when the spotlight crew went and back-checked what the paper had previously written on the topic. That, he claimed, would be the absolute first thing you'd do, before the first word was ever written. In the movie, they didn't get around to doing this until they were long into their series. Dramatic license most likely.

That's what Joel Sherman suggests Basically his point is that baseball already has an unlimited amount of time-outs -- mostly at the mound -- so the way to get a handle on them is to formalize them and slap a limit (he suggests five/game) on the number of times that a team can congregate on the field. So catcher/pitcher or infield/pitcher conferences: you burn one of your limited T.O.'s each time you do that. Need to change the pitcher: Fine, but why does that require a manager visit? And if the skipper thinks the incoming pitcher needs a talking to before facing the next hitter (like this is some batter that the opposing team just snuck onto the roster two innings before) then that's one fewer time he can go out later. Not sure how/if this will work. In general I think there are far too many time-outs in American sports* and that baseball would be far better looking towards futbol as a model rather than to football. But as a way of capping mound visits and getting rid of the dead time in the game, I think this sort of idea is worth considering. * I turned on CBS on a Sunday afternoon two weeks or so ago and there was 4:12 left in the college hoops game that preceded the golf tournament I was looking for. So I left the set on only to watch, between the coach's time-outs, TV time-outs, replay reviews, and everything else, that the final 4:12 took just shy of a half-hour to play, all for a game that wasn't even all that close.

I was just sent a copy of the settlement. This is all good. Price relief, increased availability, single team packages and this: Follow Your Team: MLB will allow all MLB.TV purchasers who subscribe to Comcast, DIRECTV, or certain other cable, satellite or other providers to purchase a "Follow Your Team" option that will allow them to receive telecasts of their favorite out-of-market team's broadcaster without any blackouts-even when it is playing an in-market team, so long as the purchaser receives the in-market team's programming through his or her television service. This product will cost no more than $10 more than a standard MLB.TV package, which will raise the overall price of the MLB.TV package to $119.99 for a full season in 2016 for consumers selecting this enhancement. I think that means I'd need to have SNY to qualify. I'm only supposed to get bumped by the Phils and I do get a lot of their games thru Comcast, including all the times they play the Mets. They've been much better than when I first subscribed (used to black me out for Pitts,Balt,Wash,&Philly). As long as they only block the Phils I'm good. I believe it means that those paying the extra $10 for the privilege of naming your favorite team will get ALL the games for that team even those against a local team that would normally be blocked out via MLB.TV as long as you also receive the channel which carries that local team. In your case, as long as you get the channel that the Phils games appears on [Comcast Sports Network, right?] then your NYM games will not be blocked even when playing the Phils. IOW, the idea behind this whole thing (I assume) is that the blackouts were specifically designed to assure the local team that customers wouldn't be canceling their service in favor of out of town games. As long as you're getting the Philly channel anyway it doesn't hurt them that you're also getting your Met games via other means.

Zvon wrote: Greg, the article you linked (must have been fb) says Mejia is also banned from playing in Korea, Mexico or Japan. Why is that? Is that part of the MLB punishment? I figured the kid could still make a decent living playing ball, but not if he can't play anywhere else. OE:good piece. But I felt bad for Mejia the first and second time. 3rd time I was kinda angry. The Japanese & Korean leagues both honor MLB rules and such. American indie leagues are available to him since they're not affiliated w/MLB but that's about it. btw, Mejia (and other suspended players) get ML service time even during their suspensions.

smg58 wrote: Since Montero is taken: Juan Lagares forces his way into regular playing time. But at whose expense? Yeah, that's the problem. For Lagares to shine would require an injury to either Granderson or Cespedes and/or a serious backslide by Conforto.

Plus, Prince Fielder doesn't merely block Ike's path, he blocks out the sun if he's standing anywhere near you!

Edgy MD wrote: Law was also cuckoo about Rosario, his rank tempered by the reality that he hasn't caught up to his league yet, but he predicted that Amed could be top ten in a year. It's all about the bat going forward for him. Already described as a potential "impact player" for defense and speed, merely a decent bat attached to all that on a 20 y/o SS will make one a good prospect. If his offense develops beyond that ... !! I've come to think it's pretty deceptive that a team's rank should fall based on players "graduating." The idea that one team should score high because of a 21-year-old shortstop in AA, while another should get bupkis because their 21-year-old shortstop prospect already has held his own for three months in the bigs does not feed a particularly accurate picture of the two team's long-range outlooks. I think it would be better to choose an age and rank all teams based on the players that they have that haven't reached their 25th birthday or such. BP does a list of exactly that for each team - although I'm not sure if they've ever ranked all the teams that way. They should get to their Mets prospect review in about two weeks.

Both Baseball America and ESPN's Keith Law came out with their prospect lists on Friday Law was less bullish on Matz than others (citing durability issues) and ranked him 37th. BA went with 13 which was much closer to where other touts have him. On the flip side, Law was higher than any of the others on both Dom Smith ("one of the best pure bats") ranking him as the best overall NYM prospect at 29th, and Amed Rosario (42nd). BA slotted Smith 79th & Rosario 58th An overall mash-up of four separate lists (BA, BP, MLB, ESPN) shows a Top-15 of: 1 -- Corey Seager, SS, Dodgers 2 -- Byron Buxton, OF, Twins 3 -- Lucas Giolito, RHP, Nationals 4 -- J.P. Crawford, SS, Phillies 5 -- Julio Urias, LHP, Dodgers 6 -- Yoan Moncada, 2B, Red Sox 7 -- Orlando Aria, SS, Brewers 8 -- Alex Reyes, RHP, Cardinals 9 -- Joey Gallo, 3B, Rangers 10 -- Tyler Glasnow, RHP, Pirates 11 -- Nomar Mazara, OF, Rangers 12 -- Blake Snell, LHP, Rays 13 -- Trea Turner, SS, Nationals 14 -- Dansby Swanson, SS, Braves 15 -- Steven Matz, LHP, Mets with Smith at 59th and Rosario 65th As for all those NL East players in the Top-15: - we'll almost definitely see Trea Turner to start the year, as a platoon player at minimum, as he got some time as a September call-up last season. Former #13 overall draft pick by SD in 2013 out of NC State, dealt to Washington in a multi player/team deal in Dec 2014. - and we'll see Lucas Giolito before the year is up although probably not to start as the Nats are likely to limit the workload on him and his already TJ-repaired, 21 y/o arm. Former 16th overall pick by the Nats in 2014 out of HS in California - J.P. Crawford is just 21 although already has a half-season of AA ball under his belt. Probably won't start the year w/Philly although may be up before the season is out. 16th overall pick in 2013 out of a California HS - although the #1 overall pick of the 2015 draft, the D'Backs dealt Dansby Swanson to the Braves just six months later in a five player deal involving (RHP) Shelby Miller. A college player for Vanderbilt although originally from nearby Marietta, Georgia (I think 70% of the Braves roster comes through Marietta), he has just a stint in short-season pro ball under his belt so, even with the Braves tradition of aggressive promotion, we're unlikely to see him in the big city in 2016

JM (via Dominican journalist Hector Gomez): “It’s not like they [MLB] say ... I’m sure I did not use anything. I will appeal. Win or lose, I have a lot of faith. I have to clear my name. … I will not stand idly by. I will take this case to the bitter end.” Tough to make that 'there must be some kind of mistake' claim after getting popped three times in a ten month span, but there's a specified path for him to try if he wants.

[fimg=360:1if6d9u0]http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/villains/images/c/ca/Hannibal_Lecter.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120114230704[/fimg:1if6d9u0] Tick Tock Kclarice

There is, btw, a path for reinstatement. He can apply after one year although, even if granted, must sit out a minimum of two (which may or may not mean 2-1/2 in his case since he still had a half-year to go on suspension #2). But even if the commish grants that for some reason, he will by then (Spring 2018) be a 28 y/o pitcher who, since the end of the 2010 season, has had reconstructive elbow surgery, a combined total of <300 innings pitched including both major (144) and minor leagues (122), and essentially a minimum of four complete missed seasons (1 injured, 3 suspended). That'll be a tough job interview.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I'd bet that he was convinced that whatever banned substance he was using was untraceable. Except that the first time he got popped it was for a very old school steroid, Stanozolol, that nobody could possibly think was untraceable since maybe the Reagan era. Failed test #2 was again reportedly Stanozolol plus something called Boldenone. And now early reports on this one mention Boldenone again. It's hard to imagine what he was imagining.

Even those of us who don't have addictive personalities or problems can understand when those with drug and alcohol addictions leave burned bridges in their path due to making bad decisions. But steroids aren't addictive (at least not in the same way) so it's almost incomprehensible that someone facing a loss of a $2.5 mi/yr job can't stay away following repeated warnings.

Edgy MD wrote: Good memory. His one at-bat in this game against the Phils kick-started a four-run game-winning rally in the 13th. He threw 2 1/3 scoreless and walked off with a win credited to his ledger, too. Mets dug out of a 5-0 hole on the road. That was the same game with the 'kick-save' play off the hot smash that bmfc references earlier. Carlos came into that game w/a runner on 2nd and 2 out in the 10th. Then note the odd but dry 'P-1B-P' put out in BB-Ref's notation for Torres's first batter but we all know that there was a lot more excitement to it than that, mainly Murphy's reversal to get the deflection then his blind backhand flip to a racing Torres to preserve the game. 2.1 innings of 1 hit/0 BB ball later, Carlos's infield single started the 4-run rally.

Lefty Specialist wrote: He's a dead ringer for Julio Franco ... Or he will be in another three or four decades.

Closing things up on Sunday night, so get it in before then.

Served his time here well in a variety of roles, just less well during the most recent season.

Bernadina is one of those guys who's a great athlete but that only occasionally translates into ball playing ability and, with a guy who will turn 32 y/o in mid-season, it's unlikely that he's suddenly going to find it either. Pieces of seven years in the big leagues but spent all of 2015 in the minors. Would he be our first Curacao-ian if he does make the squad?

Nymr83 wrote: is someone going to post the "Average List" and highs/lows as points for further debate? Well I could but it would be pretty boring. Unlike in recent years where votes for certain players have been all over the map, the entries this year have been remarkably consistent. I said before how only 32 different players (33 now that Anthony Recker got thrown a bone) were even mentioned. And of those who have been, where they've been placed on ballots just haven't varied that much. The biggest spread for the full-time players looks like Familia with a low of 15th best (Nymr) and a high of 3rd overall (Zvon). d'Arnaud scored down in 17th place (TransM) and as high as 7th (Nymr) - which sometimes says as much about how a poster rates guys who miss half a season as it does about the player's seasons itself. Zvon gave only 12 points (19th place) to Niese which was 5 or more slots below everyone else. Grimm was unusually high on Addison Reed giving him 12 pts when no one else was above 7 And so on, but for the most part not only is no one's collective vote all that far from the norm but each of their individual choices are mostly within 2 or 3 slots of the emerging consensus.

seawolf17 wrote: Poor Akeel Morris, guaranteed to be last on everyone's list if we ranked the whole team. Probably, although this season, unlike many others, there's been a very tight voting pattern to where only 32 different guys have received any vote at all, meaning that technically Morris is merely in a 17-way tie for 33rd place. So, like I said, we've got a good consensus here as the remaining 32 players fight for the coveted top 30 spots. I'm going to call for any late entries, comments, or revisions to be in by Sunday (14th) at which point I'll reveal the final tally. Also if you are going to revise an existing ballot post them in a new entry otherwise I may not see your changes (Monk, I already got your corrections).