Edgy MD

Here we go. I'm way off. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/13/sports/baseball/mets-dismiss-psychologist.htmlFran Pirozollo. 2003. It was the twilight of the Howe era, which was, of course, all twilight. He was a sports psychologist hired under a directive from Fred Wilpon, if not directly by Mr. Wilpon.

I feel it was during the sunset of the Jerry era. 2009 or so.

Who was the Mets staffer, who was technically listed as a coach, but was more on the peripheral staff than the staff-staff, and he got booted because he couldn't follow instructions to stay in the clubhouse during games, and kept wandering into the dugout? He was given a name like "mental skills coach" or something, and his end was somewhat embarrassing as it had come down to security given explicit orders to keep him out of the dugout.

Doesn't Jeff Wilpon own a team in the Overwatch League? I think SNY may be set.

Frayed Knot wrote: I can't see them making up the lost games ... not two week's worth. That would require either LOTS of DH's which neither players nor owners want or essentially ZERO off days once they get going. So we're almost certainly looking at a shortened season, the only question remains: how short? Maybe, but they made up everything in 2001. What was that? Ten days?

I think we need to have a We Won Today book club meeting.

Crap and more crap. These kind of decisions used to be made in coordination with the White House and with the leagues coordinating with each other. In our grown-up-free world, it's everyone for themselves.

It won't take much of a small run of success from Lockett for the Mets to win the Kevin Plawecki trade, but they're not there yet. I think a dumb nickname and a groundswell of cult-hero fan support would go a long the way. "Lockraven," "Lockett-to-Me," or "Texas Ranger." Some crap like that. "Walker" is just a tough name to carry as a pitcher, but cult heroism can make a strength of irony. I think he bombs out in two starts while Erasmo Ramirez and Gonsalves look more solid as emergency starters, but he does some strong work out of the bullpen, including one big game where he screws Rhys Hoskins into the ground with a slider leaving two men on in a one-run game, and walks off the mound like, "Yeah, no shit, that's what I do, no big deal" while the fans go nuts (there will be fans again). He's pretty huge —6'5", with official weights that have swing between 225 and 255 — but that will be the day fans suddenly realize it. "My God! He's a giant!"

Well, MRC has him already sitting behind Rick Porcello and pressed by Michael Wacha, so times are hard for him, and he needs all the inspirational songs from the wifey that she's got. 8-8, 4.12. Leads the league in Ron Darling faces, turning in despair and frustration whenever a batter gets to him for an extra-base hit. Comes up big at least once in the post-season, however.

http://companion.thecranepool.net/recent-transactions-blog/don-t-let-s-start[fimg=500]https://metsrostercentral.files.wordpress.com/2020/03/transaction-card-3-11-2020.gif[/fimg] The New Mets Starting Pitcher Depth Chart Jacob deGrom, L/R Marcus Stroman, R/R Noah Syndergaard, L/R Rick Porcello, R/R Steven Matz, R/L Michael Wacha, R/R Erasmo Ramirez, R/R Walker Lockett, R/R Rob Whalen, R/R Kevin Smith, L/L Congratulations to Rob Whalen for hanging tight with the big boys after a year in the wilderness. https://metsrostercentral.wordpress.com/current-mets-coaching-staff/https://metsrostercentral.files.wordpress.com/2020/02/view-mets-mlb-coaching-staff.png> https://metsrostercentral.wordpress.com/current-roster/https://metsrostercentral.files.wordpress.com/2020/02/view-mets-mlb-roster-1.png> http://companion.thecranepool.net/recent-transactions-bloghttps://metsrostercentral.files.wordpress.com/2020/03/visit-blog-button.png>

Well, I'm editing this baby and I could use contributions from you and your like. Otherwise, when somebody just writes some good shit, I may just ask permission to lift it and face it outward.

And, by your "job," I assume you are referring to "updating Mets by the Numbers." Hopefully, multiple contributors will give us the redundancy to keep that sort of grievous pressure off, as well as lend a variety of voices and angles.

Bucket just asked more or asked the same question, under different cover, so my takeaway is the idea is less than thrilling to some of our best providers. My answer, more or less, is below. The idea, I hope, is that: (1) our better, traditional, site-specific content has a (potential) audience outside the forum, of people who read links but don't participate in fora. (2) putting that content public-facing in a linkable, marketable, brandable, retrievable, lay-out-able semi-permanent spot could test its external viability, and validate it! (3) our content having multiple themes could make it like five or more well-defined and uniquely conceived blogs under one umbrella. A magazine. A fanzine, if you will. (4) it's stuff we're already doing for our narrow stupid audience, so hopefully the work isn't too duplicative once the house gets built. (5) I figured we put an aggregated feed on the front page showing recent posts in any and all categories, but also pages within devoted to just the posts in those categories. I guess pre-walkout Deadspin is a model in that you can read what comes up to the top or you can search for your favorite content sub-brands. (6) We all have social media feeds on which to push the content out. (7) Once outsiders have a taste of the content, they'll feel more at home joining forum discussions. (8) Within a year, we'll have the best and stickiest independent Mets site on the WWW. Amazin' Avenue and 7LA will be sending spies into our midst. (9) Podcast? Folks will fucking demand we have a podcast. (10) We'll have branded merchandise (shirts, cards), paying for the forum. and advertisers wanting to knock our door down and we'll be all particular. "We don't really want to ruin our site with ads ... but perhaps for the right sponsor ... ." Not only will we not have to pass the hat to pay our domain fees, but before you know it, we'll be up to our necks in cocaine, hookers, and Dave & Busters gift cards. Unsolicited book offers will rain down on us. SNY will be this close to offering us a weekly slot to produce our own shit, before getting cold feet after hearing about the hookers and blow.

Where would you say the line is on Opening Day? MetsRosterCentral currently has Céspedes, Conforto, and Lowrie penciled in for the opener, but it looks like those three are going to look a lot like Jarret Parker, Eduardo Nuñez, and Luis Guillorme.

I'm not comfortable with the best-hitter-should-bat-second thing, simply because there are different ways hitters are good, so the best hitter may be a situation-dependent designation. I didn't like Duda batting second and I don't like Alfonso there. It just seems to take so much opportunity off the table. That said, well, yeah, I don't want Miguel Cairo hitting there either.

The players aren't going to come in and hang out in the media lounge for the hours before the game. Post game? Sure. But also consider there are 25 guys. Post game, you are going to have to decide who you want in there. Do the reporters decide that? And how? They're competing against each other. The team's communications guy? You're relying on him to pick three, four, five guys to interview? That's a tough position to put him or her in. Well, I would think it would be everybody. As noted, the theory holds that each player would be required to spend X amount of time in there. if he doesn't want to speak, well, he's probably less trapped there than he would be in the locker room. He can smile and refuse interview requests and let folks know if he is overheard mumbling something, he's not on record. I'm sure there are numerous downsides, but I think more than a few are of the concerns are of the "It's been done this way, so I can't be done that way" variety. I understand the notion that players won't be as candid, but I guess we'll see during the next bunch of weeks.

Reporters are always going to want one-on-one time. They're going to avoid asking good questions, or something with an angle they have and no one else has, in a group setting. Just two questions, both of more of a practical nature than a philosophical one, and sort of on both sides of the issue. On the one hand, how is a theoretical media lounge allowing for less one-on-one time than a locker room? In theory, they're both openly filled with subjects and reporters criss-crossing and stepping on each other, with some media crowded around one blowhard big shot and others scrounging around the fringes to get a discrete quote from an overlooked source. In theory, Centerfield's version of such a space could even be about the same size, only more comfortable. The main difference would perhaps just be shlongs? On the other hand, how is the theoretical lounge any less of a Petri dish of a contamination hot zone? Is the fear that flying beads of sweat, discarded towels and vapor coming off a recently showered naked torso is significantly worse than a fully clothed cocktail party format?

Strange that he got busted down in the first round of cuts. 1-3, 5.51. Hits a double off the very top of the fence against Clayton Kershaw, on an afternoon when none of the actual Mets hitters can touch the guy. National television will have it.

I like the idea of a media room with every player and coach given a card table and a folding chair with his name on a folded tent card. He's required to be in that chair for 10 minutes before the game and 20 minutes after, even if he spends it playing with his phone or studying his Bible. Most of the time, you're ignored at your little table, but then there's the day when they suddenly they can't get enough of you.

A series of back of the order hits has the Mets up 4-0 on the Domers.

Without the data, I thought his slider was awesome, but his fastball was getting pummeled. But yeah, something was getting left up.

The same way the same player dislocated his shoulder following through on a swing. Exertion can lead to stuff. You can injure yourself taking a poo. I heard that from some other person who is totally not me.

To be fair, I kind of see that attitude as a really useful thing to have as a catcher — especially for a guy that is far more mediocre than his attitude might suggest — but it's not always easy to root for. John Buck was a perfect scenario. He had a mediocre game on both sides of the ball, but he had an All-Star red ass.

Pitchers tend to work in a vacuum when it comes to their opinions about catchers. I suspect that, "I really like working with Nido" should really be understood as, "I don't like working with Ramos," or "I couldn't get on the same page as Ramos my last turn or two." In spring, when they're throwing to eight different catchers, I get the idea that they won't think Nido is any more special compared to the norm than Ali Sanchez or Austin Bossart or maybe a few others are. But Nido is just ahead of the line right now. I'm thinking he fades from the picture this year: 28 plate appearances, .143 / .278 / .282 // .560. Like d'Arnaud, he seems sad to me, which is no sin, but he seemingly lacks the "This is my world and you're lucky to be in it" authority that a catcher needs.

=Fman99 post_id=33024 time=1583753210 user_id=86] I love the CPF companion site idea. I feel like Suzyn Waldman and John Sterling (or, I should specify, the uber disquieting puppet versions of them that live in my brain) should get some kind of sidebar or feature there.