Edgy MD

Remember that series where we had the Braves on the ropes, and walked away with a split when we were poised to sweep, or at least take three of four? Well, thank you, Mets, because the Braves have used that series to springboard forward from, and haven't lost since, having obliterated opposition, mostly divisional, to run off 12 in a row and open up a 15 and a half game lead. Mets have done at least a little more than treading water in that time, passing both Philadelphia and Colorado, moving into third place in the division, and within a game of the second-place Nationals. Also a little resurgent have been the Pads, recovering from a disastrous July to inch a little toward respectability. Even toastier over the weeks have been Don Mattingly's Dodgers. While Atlanta has won their last 10, 16 or their last 20, and 21 of their last 30, the Los Angelinos have gone 8-2 / 17-3 / 24-6 over the same period. Anyhow, root for the Mets this weekend, and maybe find a little heart to root for the Phillies over the Nats too, and maybe you wake up some day over the next three in second place. TeamWLPCTGBNGBAtlanta7045.609��Washington5460.47415.515.5YOUR New York Mets 5260.46416.517.5Philadelphia5262.45617.520.5Miami4370.38126.054.5 TeamWLPCTGBNGBSt. Louis6648.579-3.0-3.0Cincinnati6351.553��Arizona5855.5134.54.5Washington5460.4749.013.5YOUR New York Mets 5260.46410.016.5Philadelphia5262.45611.020.5San Diego5262.45611.020.5Colorado5264.44812.026.5San Francisco5163.44712.026.5Chicago5064.43913.034.5Milwaukee4966.42614.548.0Miami4370.38119.598.0

Usually, a diving catch means you extend, catch it, and then hit the ground, hopefully maintaining your grip as you absorb the impact. But look there. Rocky's knee has already hit the ground, his throwing hand his hit, and the ball isn't even in the frame. I've seen the catch a thousand times, and I can't say if his chest or catching arm lands before his catch, but if I had to bet, I'd say yeah, they did.

For what it's worth, he has been playing hobbled.

I'm not sure where the logjam that is becoming a joke is. If indeed the team has a surfeit of talent, that' s a darned good thing. If there's been a conclusive portrait of Flores at top speed in his three games thus far, I've missed it.

August 6-8: Mets 3, Rockies 2 Mets 5, Rockies 0 Mets 2, Rockies 1 Mets can clearly play with anybody as long as the starting pitching is on. Mets starters in this series: 21 innings 2 walks 16 strikeouts Not bad, against the fourth-best offense in the league.

For some reason, Swoboda's catch was long known as "Swoboda's Circus Catch." Other diving catches have gotten that appellation, but it seemed pretty fixed on his. I call it the Greatest Catch in World Series History. Cleon made a nifty catch in the Series that would long be remembered if it wasn't the fourth best outfield catch they had.

He may well end up at first, and has played there this season, but I don't think it's a commitment the team has to make today. Everybody in baseball is gravitating toward first --- all non-pitchers anyhow --- and the job of coaches and trainers and team physicians is to keep that from happening as long as possible. Anybody that retires without having landed there is a small victory.

Could change that last word to "buggery" and keep everything else the same.

Because he was found to be slower than the last day of school, so the reports say.

The day was saved then lost again, thus needing re-saving.

We just beat a guy named Jeff Manship. My bus is going to get me home tonight powered purely by my grinding libido.

Well, you know, Flores has had two games, and one big hit. Makes all the sense in the world to move a future Hall of Famer and diminish his on-field value. Where do I sign up? Oh, at the Palace of Crazy? OK!

Um...

Vic Sage wrote: Young LF Lagares CF Murphy 3b Davis 1b D'Anaud C Duda RF Flores 2b Tejada SS\ I'll be platooning all over the place. Flores at first, second, and third, Murphy at third, and second. Duda in left and right. Young at second and left (got to get him some time at second). Satin... um...

Check this one out! It's good to be king.

Actually, let's do this right. "Yeah, that was me, you young punk."

I really feel full of myself when my team scores off of a guy named "Jeff Manship."

And he sure has a bucketload of walks. That's bases sloshed and no outs. Wilmer ROCKS with the bags juiced.

He actually does have a single homerun since his return. The three-run capper to that 11-0 blowout of Washington.

MFS62 wrote: I'd like to see Ike make it to the Mendoza line today. Later Up to .199.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: The last time the Mets got their first CG/ShO in April was in 2005, when Aaron Heilman shocked legions of Mets fans by pitching a one-hitter against the Marlins on April 15. What shocked more, I think, was Heilman stating in apparent seriousness after the game that he had to come up with a new strategy for coming back at the Marlins in his next game. Whatever that new strategy was, it didn't work half as good as the old one, as he went four innings, giving up seven runs, on 11 hits. Ooops.

Ceetar wrote: 'm sure we're all guilty of one or two here and there. You hear a phrase (and who speaks clearly? I know I mumble with the best of them) and you like it and you reuse it. Suddenly you have to write it (And you write more in the Internet age) and I find myself a lot of times googling words and phrases for things like this, but some probably sneak through. Wrote 'for granted' yesterday and couldn't decide if it should've been one word or not. Yabbut, if anybody should know "for all intents and purposes," it's a lawyer.

Not doing so much editing any more. The eyes are going anyhow. I caught the first half of your phrase and missed the pun that redeemed it. I hated editors (and professors) that would tag the first half of a seemingly errant turn of phrase and miss the whole point of it. Look at me now. LOOK AT ME NOW!!

Centerfield wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Don't worry. He was riding the same wagon for Jordany at shortstop eight weeks ago. More importantly, did our house counsel just use "For all intensive purposes..."? No. I said "intensive porpoises". Oh, thank Gawd. It's always comforting to know I'm the stupid one.