Frayed Knot

Desmond defensively is the polar opposite of Flores. Desmond is MUCH more athletic with all that entails: better arm, quicker release, better range, etc., and will make the spectacular play. But is also more prone to kicking the routine ball and his errors seem to snowball into another in groups; not really sure why that is. Given the choice FOR THIS YEAR you'd want Desmond but of course that choice isn't on the table.

I don't believe I've ever been to a Taco Bell. If I have I don't remember it. Assuming that I haven't, I don't think that breakfast is the best intro meal for fast food pseudo-Mexican.

TransMonk wrote: He was up by 7 answers with 17 questions left. BAM!

4/27: Gee pitches a beauty in Miami, the game only lasts 1:58, Murphy hits a 3-run HR in the 9th, Mets win 3-1, I'm there. 2nd shortest game of the year in all of MLB btw. Only this one was shorter, a game featuring dual CGs by Chris Sale (108 pitches) and ** Surprise ** Mark Buehrle (104) which clocked in at 1:54 despite a relatively high 6 runs on 15 hits (combined). No BBs and a total of only 6 Ks helped. See, Mr. Commissioner, it CAN be done. That's it for the thread hijack. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Ceetar wrote: The rule that required them to sign him within 5 days was a little more complicated and seemed to be part of some older rules/pre-QO put in place. I don't recall the exact reasons since it doesn't matter, but the crux of it was that teams that didn't retain their own guys had to wait until May 15th to re-sign them. It was simply because, coming out of Cuba as he did, he arrived at MLB as the equivalent of a professional FA so had the power to negotiate such a clause into his deal. It both allowed him to be a FA after just 4 seasons and put pressure on his current team to either re-up ahead of time or risk losing him. Several of the Japanese pros have had similar clauses so as to not have to put in the six full years before attaining FA status. Turned out for Yeonis to be a rather strange trip as I don't figure he or his agent anticipated being in his 4th organization before his initial 4-year deal ran out, but that's the way the ball bounces (off his foot).

SMACK TALK - because it was so un-Duda-like NY CITI - because it foreshadowed Grandy's role as emerging team leader NOW OR NEVER - because it boldly stepped-up the expectations The Harvey covers, by contrast, were either redundant or seemed liked headlines in search of a story

Well, it would be Muffy in for Duda plus whatever you get for dealing Duda. I mean, I'm just blabbing here, but we do need a spot for either or both of Flores & Herrera and I'd prefer Flores NOT be the regular SS. But if this theoretical trade of Duda could net us a real SS then Murphy could play 1B until either Dabid needs to move across the diamond or until Dom Smith is ready.

TEAMMANAGERSIGNED THRUSTATUSHiredMETSTerry Collins2017Two Year Extension - Nov '1511/23/2010BRAVESFredi Gonzalez201510/13/2010PHILLIESPete MacKanin2016Interim tag removed for 20166/29/15NATIONALSMatt Williams2017Dusty Baker Hired - 2 year deal11/4/2015MARLINSDan Jennings2019Don Mattingly Hired - 4 year dealNov 2015CARDINALSMike Matheny201711/20/2013PIRATESClint Hurdle2017 + option for �1811/15/2010CUBSJoe Maddon201910/31/2014REDSBryan Price201610/22/2013BREWERSCraig Counsell2015-20175/4/15DODGERSDon Mattingly2016Resigned - 10/22/159/17/2010GIANTSBruce Bochy2016Oct 2006PADRESPat Murphy2015Will not return6/15/15DBACKSChip Hale201610/13/2014ROCKIESWalt Weiss201611/7/2012RED SOXJohn Farrell2016Extended thru 201710/20/2012YANKEESJoe Girardi201710/30/2007ORIOLESBuck Showalter20187/28/2010BLUE JAYSJohn Gibbons2015 + option for �1611/20/2012RAYSKevin Cash201912/04/2014TIGERSBrad Ausmus2016 + option for �1711/4/2013INDIANSTerry Francona2016Extended thru 2018 w/options for '19 + �2010/8/2012ROYALSNed Yost20155/13/2010TWINSPaul Molitor201711/4/2014WHITE SOXRobin Ventura201410/6/2011ANGELSMike Scioscia201811/17/1999RANGERSJeff Banister201710/17/2014MARINERSLloyd McClendon201?Fired 10/9/15 - Scott Servais hired10/23/2015ASTROSAJ Hinch2017 + '18 option9/29/2014ATHLETICSBob Melvin20166/9/2011

Gutsy move re: Murph -- Gamble that this increased power/reduced strikeouts is real (and spectacular) and will continue // install him at 1B where his glove will do less damage and trade Duda (2 years from FA) to fill other holes. You'll still lose some HR pop but will increase consistency, lower Ks, be about the same in speed. Install Flores and/or Herrera at 2B, get a REAL SS via the Duda deal or elsewhere. Nimmo's "problem" is sort of related to Murphy in that he might wind up being a bit of a "tweener", not enough power to excel in a corner OF spot but not really a CF either. More likely to wind up as a high-OBP 1st or 2nd hitter than a middle of the order thumper. But Conforto has clearly moved ahead of him for the LF job, both now obviously but probably long term as well because of his powah!

Mex17 wrote: Fman99 wrote: That's really a rainbow of meh with that group. But would you agree that all of them are an improvement over Kirk Nieuwenhuis? Sure but that's not a real high bar right now. Kirk was essentially a 5th OF much of the season and, with Conforto now ready for prime time, would be 3rd in line just among LH-hitting OFs. But very few FAs who are at or near their prime and capable of playing CF -- even among the "non-superstar" part of your definition -- are going to sign a deal with their eye on snagging Kirk's 150 or so ABs, particularly not the likes of Heyward, Rasmus, Fowler, or Span who are going to command multi-year deals with a commitment that they'll be full-time players and not just platoon w/Juan vs RHPs.

Coming up as he was on the final year of his contract (option year actually) the club was pretty much forced into doing something seeing as how allowing a pennant winning manager to enter the next season in full lame-duck status is probably the poorest option out there. That leaves either extending him or, in effect, firing him and the latter certainly isn't a good move pr-wise, particularly absent some outstanding candidate ready to take over.

Do you feel like we do? -- Bob Mayo on keyboards, Bob Mayo

Frustrated, in that: - these chances don't come along all that often so, when they do, you need to seize them or at least put up a good fight; we did pretty much the opposite in this one aside from some good starting pitcing. And the talk about how this season is the year we 'took back the city' and is just the beginning of a string of good seasons to come ... well I heard the same song back when some fans were spouting their 'it's all right' attitude after losing to StL in 2006. - we've now lost 8 of the last 10 WS games we've played. And although there's obviously no correlation between the 2000 team and this one so any conclusions about 'lacking character' or other such silly notions connecting the two don't really apply, those 8 losses have included three extra-inning games, plus two one-run defeats and two two-run defeats. IOW, other than the Game 2 loss to KC, every game has been winnable. Toss out our semi-blowout in Game 3 and they've essentially had 8 close games and lost 7 of them, including several where they held late leads.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Grantland's demise couldn't have come at a worse time. ... Their football writing was so refreshing, so groundbreaking, so far ahead of the field, I thought, that it made practically all other NFL pieces seem as if they were written by the kids that write restaurant reviews for their High School newspapers. More like written by those who fear getting on the bad side of the NFL and feel they can't risk losing access or find themselves uninvited to future reindeer games.

So apparently the Nationals didn't say they were hiring Black, man. What they meant is that they're hiring the black man. Amid rumors of not being able to come to terms with presumed managerial hire Bud Black (lousy cheap-ass owners!) those talks ended and the team is apparently confirming the story making the rounds that they will take on Dusty Baker as their next dugout skipper. If true, Terry would still retain his title as MLB's oldest manager as Baker clocks in at three weeks younger.

From the on-line Q&A session re: the future of the middle infield Q: In three years who do you think the 2B and SS are? A: I’m inclined to say Amed Rosario at shortstop and Wilmer Flores at second base. Obviously that means players like Dilson Herrera, Gavin Cecchini and Matt Reynolds could be utility players or trade fodder (though nothing ever plays out as planned in baseball, it seems). Flores showed me something this year by hitting 16 HR during the season, playing an adequate shortstop at a time when the club really needs him and getting better swings on RHPs as the season progressed. and then later in the session: Las Vegas SS Matt Reynolds has a lower ceiling than most prospects in the Mets top 20, but he’s much closer to his ceiling than anyone outside the top five overall.

DL time counts as service time as far as contract status and all of that. But I believe rookie status is determined by active roster time and the prospect ratings orgs usually follow that.

BA chimes in with their list: 1. Steven Matz, lhp 2. Amed Rosario, ss 3. Dominic Smith, 1b 4. Gavin Cecchini, ss 5. Brandon Nimmo, of 6. Marcos Molina, rhp 7. Luis Carpio, ss/2b 8. Desmond Lindsay, of 9. Matt Reynolds, ss/2b 10. Wuilmer Becerra, of and a Q & A session to go along with it. http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/new-york-mets-top-10-prospects-chat/

metirish wrote: What's his name from KC is a FA? Alex Gordon.

Yeah, that all sounds like after the fact malarky. Duda's always thrown fine to 2B on potential GiDP balls and the like, usually accurate and with a quick release. Better than Ike even IMO even though it was Davis who had the better fielding rep and the pitcher's arm. Yaqui fans (and sometimes their mgmt) have long been big on claiming that whenever an opposing player would have a bad series (particularly in post-season) it was the work of the great Yanqui scouting department who "figured him out" in advance. On the flip side any player having a good series against them was passed off as the guy being "a Yanqui killer", an all-purpose catch-all that reduced it to something with no logical explanation other than perhaps the player having made a deal with the devil. Such thinking serves the dual purpose of giving your team credit when things go right and no blame when things go wrong. Kind of like the excuse making that went on when outside acquisitions like Pedro Feliciano (the Mets over-used him!!) or Jeff Weaver (how were we supposed to know he couldn't handle NYC?) didn't turn out to be what they thought.

Kenny is also an advocate of essentially doing away with the traditional model of starting pitchers entirely and patching yourself through a game via shorter spurts from several hurlers. That fact doesn't negate his argument but you do have to realize where he's coming from and that if Harvey had blown up in the 8th inning he could probably make a case that Terry would have been better pulling at the end of 7. What he's saying here is that fatigue/too many pitches makes even your best pitcher no longer your best pitcher so that a replacement is likely to be better going forward. The counter to that is that you'd be taking out a guy who you KNOW is good that night (and right up to that moment) in exchange for one who you hope will be good that night. With either method you're almost certain to run up against diminished returns at some point and I'm not sure that Kenny's odds based on what is usually small sample stuff, such as stats on pitches after #100, are all that better than the odds that one or more of the replacements not having it that night.

I alluded to this in one of the IGTs and now I've just gone back and checked the box scores. There were ten different times over the five games where the Royals hit grounders/bouncers to NYM infielders in potential DP situations [runner on 1st, 1st & 2nd, or 1st & 3rd <2 outs] In those plays, not only did the Mets turn a GiDP in just two of them but only two others even resulted in a force out meaning it wound up with the effect of moving the runner(s) up a base, some of which helped set up runs. In all, a potential of 20 outs via 10 grounders in DP situations resulted in a total of 10 outs. So was this a case of good Royals, bad Mets, or just bad luck? Probably some of each. 1) Good Royals -- A majority of those grounders were towards the RF side of the diamond where DPs are usually tougher to turn -- including four where Duda had no play but to take the unassisted out at 1st resulting in one or more runners moving up a base. It's a smallish sample but it does imply some sort of intent on the part of KC hitters (and the bat skill to pull it off) to hit behind runners and get the side benefit of the unofficial sacrifice even if the ball doesn't find a hole. 2) Bad Mets -- Three of these plays went to Murphy and we all know he wound up completely botching two of them (in the other he actually made a smart tag-and-throw DP). And there was one other to Duda where the attempted 3-6-3 wasn't completed because he and Syndergaard got in each other's way although that one was going to be a tough turn even if played well. 3) Bad Luck -- Even if you grant the KC batters points for smartly hitting behind runners, most of what came off their bats in those instances were simply hit too shitty to allow a DP to even contemplated. Slow choppers, spinning side-winders, and topped squibs have to be seen more as shit luck than intentional strategy.

cooby wrote: Maybelline: Now catering to hookers It was amazing how a commercial featuring women with their tits half out while advertising the product's "push-up" quality was somehow about eye makeup. The only thing missing was a line about how it makes your lashes "lift and separate".

So if we sweep next season's opening series do we get to claim a split of the eight-game series and half of a WS crown?

metsmarathon wrote: Swing for fences bad. Swinging for hits good. It's not that simple really. Over the course of a full season the Royals scored more runs than the Mets, but not by a big margin (724 vs 683 - or basically 1/4 R/G) and did so in a league that always scores more often due to the DH. They also had to deal with far fewer injuries - every starter on their post-season lineup (which was the same every single night through all three series) was the same as their opening day lineup with the exception of Zobrist at 2B. Only Gordon in LF and Rios in RF missed any time during the season and both for only short stretches. Every one of their starting eight started over 100 games and six of the eight over 140. And of course there's the whole Mets 1st half/2nd half thing. After August 1st the Mets out-scored KC 318 to 284 As I said in another thread, there's definitely room for a conversation about whether this KC model of aggressive swinging yet low-K's/low-walks is an undervalued skill-set, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that it is and I think it works in their case only with help from their home park and because those players also run well for the most part and play excellent defense.