Edgy MD

Non-Mets stuff: [list:x40z7kds][*:x40z7kds]Josh Hamilton meeting with Commissioner Gordon to discuss a disciplinary issue, and isn't even in camp with the Angels, who have agreed to let him rehab his injury while staying at "a friend's house in Houston," which sounds deeply ominous. [/*:m:x40z7kds] [*:x40z7kds]David Ortiz has declared his intention to be entirely and intransigently non-compliant with new rules stating that batters have to keep at least one foot in the box in between pitches, declaring that the game is "100 years old" and shouldn't be changed. David intends to resist these new rules at least as aggressively as he has resisted math and history classes. [/*:m:x40z7kds] [*:x40z7kds]Reds are not expecting Homer Baily to be ready for the start of the season. Know who will be ready? Dillon Gee.[/*:m:x40z7kds][/list:u:x40z7kds]

Just now realizing they're flying into Arlington for two against Texas before getting a travel day heading into DC. Strange.

Sure, I just liked the tone better. Let's get personal. My prediction for Dillon Gee is that he'll pitch 68 innings out of the bullpen and smell terribly. My prediction for Daniel Murphy is that he'll have a personal high in errors and his jokes will be awful.

Ceetar wrote: Sure, every single one of Curtis Granderson's fly balls could land in that tiny section of Citi Field that's newly a home run territory. It's highly unlikely though. Here's another thing I didn't assert which you imply I did. Gonna be a long year.

It'll be because of the blackmail.

With regard to the offense-burdened losing record: [list:3l1b1oxn]> The Mets scored 3.88 runs per game last year. > Assumming a typical Harvey start averages seven innings, pitching to a 3.43 ERA, he will yield two innings to the bullpen. > Assuming the bullpen pitches at the same level as last season, they will function to a 3.14 ERA. > Assuming Harvey gets standard performance from the Mets bullpen, a typical Harvey start will yield 3.38 earned runs to the other side, combining his performance with that of his relievers. > Assuming the Mets defense performs at a level comparable to last year's squad, they will yield 0.09 unearned runs for every earned run the team allows. > Assuming Harvey gets standard performance from his defense (and his strikeout rate should probably allow us to imagine he gets better, but let's be conservative), his typical start should yield 0.31 unearned runs > Assuming all that falls in line, a typical Harvey start should yield 3.69 runs. (We're using full numbers in the adding but I'm only representing to the hundredths. > Assuming he gets standard performance from his offense, that will be a lower score than the 3.88 runs they scored last year, suggesting he should have a winning record, given those assumptions and an average amount of luck. A .525 winning percentage. > Assuming he gets 28 starts, that amounts to something like a 10-9 record, because mean regression is like that, with nine no-decisions. But still, those numbers are enough to suggest he'll out pitch his offense.[/list:u:3l1b1oxn] We're assuming a lot — including that standard offensive levels will be the same as last year's, which they likely won't, considering that they've moved in the fences on the right side. (This actually would suggest that his 3.43 ERA would have more value.) So what do you think will abandon him here? it could be the defense, the bullpen, or his luck? But you definitely pin the blame on the offense. Do you think it will get meaningfully worse?

I preferred your prediction from the "Prospect Porn" thread. My $$ on Big Fat Disappointment, emphasis on "Fat."

Ceetar wrote: I tell you this every time, but you don't listen. Every time what? Ceetar wrote: I'm not including you, or anyone specifically. There exists a perception that I thought was worth making light of. Yes, you're addressing me, and then suddenly you're not. You're speaking to the wind. This is the great out of the straw man argument. Come on. Who are you speaking of? Ceetar wrote: Would it make you feel better if I'm simply said "Granderson was ok last year, and I think he can be better."? It's not about feelings. Ceetar wrote: And the outfield definitely works that way, but the fence differences are so negligible that I don't even think it's worth mentioning as a factor. If it definitely works this way, I would ask you to definitely prove it. Ceetar wrote: But in theory a CF plays one step more towards left because he doesn't need that step to right to cover that extra 40 sq ft of grass that's now behind the wall. Is it a theory? Or is it "definite"? Ceetar wrote: He now gets to, in general, a larger percentage of the outfield grass, meaning BABIP should drop. And number should be almost exactly proportionate to the number of balls that land beyond the wall. I don't think that would be true, and I'd like to see the data demonstrating this.

Yeah, you're getting into the heart of the order now, baby. I'm Matt Harvey and I've been chomping at the bit for about 17 months. What's going to happen? How do I know? I know everything, but still I'm boggled. BOGGLED! But I'm a lightning rod, baby. Everybody's got an opinion about me. And about Qualcomm. [fimg=500:rxnhvf6z]https://blog-blogmediainc.netdna-ssl.com/upload/SportsBlogcom/1660342/0792017001422810959_filepicker.jpg[/fimg:rxnhvf6z] [fimg=500:rxnhvf6z]https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/harveyfinger1.jpg[/fimg:rxnhvf6z] [fimg=500:rxnhvf6z]http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2013/02/26/sports/baseball/26harvey/26harvey-superJumbo.jpg[/fimg:rxnhvf6z] Opinions, man. Opinions are like UCLs. Everybody except R.A. Dickey has one, but some just won't hold up to the challenges that regular usage places on them. What do you think is going to happen to me in 2015? And hey, how 'bout those Rangers?

It's a shame that so many of the Hodges bios are baldfacedly built as HoF campaign literature. His is a great story. Just tell it and let it stand on its own, rather than as an overt lobbying tool.

No, it is. I shouldn't have to walk you through this, but when you are directly addressing my contention on the issue of Granderson's OBP, and then build on that this nebulous third person of "people seem to forget" you are deliberately implying that I am part of this group, when I in fact am not. I understand rhetorical devices, and when folks are using them. If you have a group of people you take issue with, I would beg you to identify them. Name names. Else you are putting arguments on others in order to defeat them and crown yourself champion. But this glory will always be unsatisfying. Fleeting. Ephemeral. To be an intellectual leader in a universe of one inside your own head. What joy can that sustain?

Ceetar wrote: It's not that drastic. I mean, he reached at .326 last year. If you replay last season plate appearance for plate appearance, he'll get an OBP bump just from the new wall. Will he? like what? .002? Or maybe .004, which is what we're talking about and all we ned. Ceetar wrote: It's such a tiny change We don't need much. Ceetar wrote: and the maybe 1-2 home runs that might land there And maybe 3-4. Five wouldn't be unreasonable either. Ceetar wrote: will be negated by the one or two balls that don't fall in because the outfielders now covers a larger percentage of the grass. Maybe. I don't think that's how smaller parks tend to work. Ceetar wrote: People seem to forget Granderson had a wRC+ of 108 last season, so he was 8% better than average. It's not great, but he had a few valleys and not enough peaks. Level it out some and it'll be very helpful. Let's have a year without straw men here at the Crane Pool.

It's not that drastic. I mean, he reached at .326 last year. If you replay last season plate appearance for plate appearance, he'll get an OBP bump just from the new wall.

I'm close to that. I'd bet tempted to give him more RBI and a little more slugging, just 'cuz, but I imagine he'll see some time in the one and two holes. .252 BA .345 OBP .479 SLG

My sources keep telling me it's the intercostal.

How much $$ does Roger McDowell make every time his episode ("The Boyfrriend, Part 2") airs?

He's going to get a knock on the door any minute now.

I don't have the time, of course, sit back and view this all like I'd want to. I recall the gentlemen being introduced and escorted by young women dressed as gentle-ladies from the late reconstruction/early industrialization period. White ladies escorting black gents and black ladies escorting white gents may belie the era, but everybody rolled with it.

Really, you should mention Bill Wambsganss twice. Who in the Mets front office was kicking back at the Old Timer's Day meeting and said, "You know, we should really give Wambsganss a call"?

It's great because it's metanostalgia. "Thrill to the joys of 1977 as we harken back to the salad days of 1955. Let's cast our minds back 38 years to a time when folks were casting their minds back 25 more years."

Vic Sage wrote: ...but he too will fail and flail before settling in as the #2, behind Murphy, who is the only guy on the roster who can work the count, get on with some consistency and run ok... Murphy? Really? Spent the better part of his career with the tagline "He'd be a pretty good hitter if only he could get the walks." Work the count + get on with some consistency + run OK = Wright, certainly, but I guess he gets removed from the conversation because he's earmarked for the three-hole. I trust Granderson by those terms as much as or more than Murphy. Maybe I'll trust Lagares and/or den Dekker soon also. But Murphy does bring significantly more contact than Granderson, and that's not nothing.

Hey, there. I'm Curtis Granderson. Met fans rejoiced when I was signed away from the Yankees. Well, six or seven of them did anyhow. I grew up in Chicago and my favorite show was Saved by the Bell. The problem was my Metly career got off to a start that was too little AC and far too much Screech. But I'm still a dude. How much dude will I be in 2015. What do you think?

Terry is looking at early May for Parnell's return. So until then, the field looks like: >>>>>>>>>MEJIA<<<<<<<<< >>>EDGIN<<<>>>>FAMILIA<<< >>GILMARTIN<>>> BLACK<<<< >>>>>>>>TORRES<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>GEE<<<<<<<<<

Your typical lefty specialists tend to be slider in/slider away-types. Always around the strike zone but never quite in it. If they lose a guy, it's a walk, but not a KABOOM. Occasionally the slider sets up the 88-MPH fastball up and in, but even that won't be in the strike zone. A changeup-reliant lefthanded reliever isn't exactly what I want to throw up against Freddie Freeman and Adam LaRoche.