Edgy MD

Zvon wrote: dinosaur jesus wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: This ex-Met was a tort plaintiff in a baseball related lawsuit that was ultimately heard by the New York Court of Appeals, the State's highest court. Elliott Maddox. I want a red belt like that. My favorite Met memory of Elliott Maddox (actually, it's my only memory) is of him executing a perfect hit and run, hitting the ball through the right side when the second baseman left to cover the base. The next time up, the shortstop covered, and he hit it through the right side. That's great hitting, I thought. This Elliott Maddox is a great hitter. My memory is of him going after a sure homer while playing right at Shea. He cruised back and jumped up on the wall, standing on the middle wood frame of the plexiglass bullpen fence, and reaching up to.... He never had a chance for the ball. The ball sailed over his head and maybe even the bullpen. I just remember thinking how I like that he gave it that extra dramatic flair. My most vivid Maddox memory is him working out of position for a season a third base, learning on the job for the most part. Playing, I guess, near the line, with a runner on first, he moved toward the hole, stumbling to glove a ball on his left. Continuing to stumble as the threw from about a third of the way toward second, he released this rubbery wounded bird of a throw, that bounced a full two times over it's sixty-foot journey before reaching second, and still arrived in time for the putout.

I'm confused at how everybody on the planet was supposed to know it's coming.

Bob Meusel had swung and missed on the play, so I'm going to think it was maybe a failed hit and run, and the onus of the failure then would be on Meusel. Besides, Ruth had promised a sick kid a homerun in game four, and after coming through on that promise with not one, not two, but three homeruns, the kid's condition miraculously improved. I love Carlos Beltran, but call me when his post season play reaches the level where it has the power to heal. Plus, you want post-season heroics. That series was all about Grover Cleveland Alexander, Rogers Hornsby's faith in him, and the power of human redemption.

The Dodgers just seem like such classless badasses, it's hard to bet against them. If they lose, they're gonna go down ugly. The Beard Sox are some mofos looking for a throwdown too. A Soxy-Dodgey series would be a lot of color. I'll pick LA in Six, and Higgs-Bosun in five.

Why in the world would I be stirring up shit? I see white and I say "white." Yeah, it's not pure white, but it's just off white and it's not particularly green at all and it's very different from anything before or since.

And this is just a terrible way to go out.

Still a half shade off? Sure. But close enough that you can't quite make out a coloriffic distinction between the baserunner's knee and the frame of the bullpen-window part of the wall behind him begins. Note that they kept the far corners in left and right green. They did this to demonstrate to 2013 audiences that the attempted whitewashing had occurred, and this is what had been there before.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: You seem to be saying two different things. It's possible that the Mets used white paint to redo the walls ... if so, the white, mixed with the dark green, yielded some shade of light green. That's possible. But the early '67 walls weren't white. Just look at the youtube video and compare the walls to the Mets uniforms, or the sleeves on the Pirates uniforms. Those walls aren't white. Which I acknowledge. but it also should be acknowledged that it is significantly different from what came before and after. Whether they painted it white or attempted white or whitefail, the main point remains, that it was a dramatic, white-ish departure that lasted a very short time in the great scheme of things. Also notable in that video, when you spy the windows from the wall into the bullpen, the frame around it is as white as Tom Sawyer's pickets. They perhaps used fresh wood there that didn't have a green undercoat.

But here it is 1966 behind the stage some band set up. The tone for the first homestand of 1967 is different. And again, 1969. That's two green cookies with a creamy middle, dontcha think?

Shea in 1969:

They're not a darker type. They're black. And this is definitely a lighter base color. And I'm sticking to my contention that it's white paint with the only tone is coming from the green underneath bleeding through. Something briefly different happened at the start of 1967.

Jump ahead to about 4:30 in this video and you can see the wall painted white. I imagine the league whisteled it. Probably was blinding to hitters when the sun hit it, and really dangerous if you were facing a guy who dropped down low. [youtube:lh1grld6]3GB_kkbFVhk[/youtube:lh1grld6] It almost seems to have a hint of baby blue on the film. Maybe that's the green bleeding through.

That too.

Ceetar wrote: Edgy MD wrote: They not only refused to assist McCourt, but actively forced his hand. Of course they were worse off and the McCourts were actively missing payroll dates and hiding money and other nefarious things, like cutting security. Certainly.

Shepherd penis.

The outfield wall was white for Seaver's debut. I think the white was gone by the next homestand. I think they're in the midst of painting it there. Notice the dark section in right field and the worker facing it.

They not only refused to assist McCourt, but actively forced his hand. Where is the trap from which there is no escape documented?

Lefty Specialist wrote: Gwreck wrote: The Dodgers winning the LCS would be yet one more example of the positive change that can happen when you dump your shitty owner with legal troubles in favor of people with actual cash to spend. And that's why I hate them. Bud forced them to do that. Meanwhile he bent over backwards to keep the Wilpons in place, even lending them money in their hour of need. We're in a trap from which there is no escape. Don't believe that for a second.

Nice work. Cooby, I think Rey-O is your ticket. If we take dino j as our standard --- if we even approach that --- we have a book deal coming to us.

Seaver is supposedly Ango-Saxon derived version of the Latin "severus," meaning "one with a grave or austere demeanor." Have my doubts. Koosman comes from the Dutch, for "chosen man." Gentry, of course, comes from the Norman-English word for "wealthy man with terrible taste in pants."

I don't know what Jarrod means, but Saltalamacchia means, "jump the stain."

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: metirish wrote: Some McNuggets right there from Joe.....clicked on the link but didn't see anything like an interview, It's actually at Fangraphs. Yeah, sorry about that. I accidentally included the link to the link. Who needs that?

Joe McEwing, Future Manager: Likes McBunting. (He expands on why.) Dislikes Infield McShifting. Pitch McCounts? He thinks they overdo that. McHunches vs. McNumbers? He favors a compromise approach. He also thinks you need to justify your thinking, which beats most McHunch advocates.

Vic Sage wrote: he's going to want 7 years at the least, and he'll likely get no less than 5. And if Pence is getting $18m/yr, he's going to want no less than 20M. With the Pence deal as his floor, he'll get in the range of 5-6 years, $18-$20m/yr. so we can talk about $12m/yr x 4, which i think approximates his worth at this point, but its unlikely to be meaningful in terms of reflecting what it will take to get him. just for the record, i agree with Meyers. Pass on Choo unless he falls into our lap with an Edgy-like deal. Pretty much the strategy the Mets took with Michael Bourn, letting the market come to them, and walking when it didn't take that last step. That's fine and good (anybody have a day this year when you regretted missing out on Bourn?), but as much as I admire the restraint, they're likely to go big on somebody, sooner or later.

"We have 60,000 fans and even more on TV. It's run like a business around here. It is like a business essentially, except we don't get paid." Wonder how aware he was of the irony?