Jump to content
Grand Central Mets
  • Create Account

Edgy MD

Site Manager
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    92,364

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    35

 Content Type 

Profiles

New York Mets News, Rumors & Analysis

New York Mets Videos

2026 New York Mets Top Prospect Rankings

New York Mets Trade & Free Agent Rumors

New York Mets Fan Guides & Resources

2026 New York Mets Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Edgy MD

  1. Edgy MD
    I think every team has a roster spot dedicated to a relatively ineffective/out of sorts/project pitcher who pitches mopup in situations of little consequence. There's certainly room on the roster for such a guy. The Mets wanted to give that spot to another guy, and he frustrated those plans, but it didn't cost them anything. Jerry being vindictive and avoiding using Ollie in even those spots probably cost them more. If the GM sees fit to keep him on the roster, the manager has a job to get what he can out of him. Ceetar wrote: Except that M went just as long not using Elmer Dessens either. So it's not like he was sitting there wishing he had another pitcher out there. And the Mets brought him back from the minors early for some odd reason. Certainly. Jerry and Omar had a funny thing going with the way the former openly disregarded the players the latter gave him.
  2. Edgy MD
    I understand where you're coming from, but it didn't cost the Mets a thing.
  3. Edgy MD
    Pitching well in the off-season, in spring training, and in his first two starts on the road will certainly soften the abuse he gets upon his homecoming, in intensity and duration. So would a press-narrative that scapegoats Manuel for undermining Perez, which is true though certainly hugely over-simplistic. But that's a long road home.
  4. Edgy MD
    And now it gets interesting. WLERAGGSCGSHOSVIPHRERHRBBSOGO/AOAVG-A203.007200015125509140.67.222
  5. Edgy MD
    Steve, it's giving time. Name your charity.
  6. Edgy MD
    I'll supbract a few EDB* points from Rodriguez and drop him two slots, but the averaging will have to do the rest. 30 Wright * * * 29 Pagan * * * 28 Santana 27 Dickey 26 Davis 25 Reyes 24 Rodriguez * * * 23 Bay * * * 22 Takahashi 21 Pelfey 20 Acosta 19 Francoeur 18 PFeliciano 17 Niese 16 Beltran 15 Dessens 14 Thole 13 Barajas 12 Parnell * * * 11 Gee 10 Tejada 9 Castillo 8 Carter 7 Valdes * * * 6 Blanco 5 Mejia 4 Duda 3 Misch 2 Evans 1 Hernandez *Enormous Douche Bag
  7. Edgy MD
    Jordany Valdespin, coming off his successful AFL campaign, was Rule V eligiible. So said Toby Hyde, and the Mets musta been reading, because BAM! they added him to the 40-man roster.
  8. Edgy MD
    batmagadanleadoff wrote: Oh wait. Named after a song NOT in the film. That disqualifies Pepper. And prolly An American in Paris. But Murder, He Says still stays.
  9. Edgy MD
    I'm pretty sure that Jim Carrey's life is still pretty good.
  10. Edgy MD
    1) Yes. 2) He was.
  11. Edgy MD
    Both good.
  12. Edgy MD
    I think this sub-forum is at it's best reviewing afterthought films like this, a few years old and prematurely forgotten.
  13. Edgy MD
    Mixed review by some guy watching the AFL. Valdespin showed great tools, but little in the way of how to play. He turned on a Jeremy Jeffress 99 MPH fastball like it wasn't even an issue and showed good range and throwing arm on several plays. But he is inconsistent from play-to-play, showing a lack of concentration. He also swings at nearly everything and has poor hitting mechanics.
  14. Edgy MD
    I am incorrect. While "Wargames" did not appear in Wargames, footage from the latter is featured in the video from the former. In fact, that's all there is, unless this is a latter-day creation. about "Romancing the Stone," however.
  15. Edgy MD
    Even accepting the inference of their comments as "hate," wouldn't you expect around 100% of batters to want their outfield walls closer and 100% of pitchers to want them further away?
  16. Edgy MD
    RealityChuck wrote: I assume you don't mean songs like "Key Largo," which was written about the movie. No, because clearly that film wasn't named after the song. Valley Girl, on the other hand, was clearly inspired by the song of the same name, but featured the song not.
  17. Edgy MD
    You're not alone.
  18. Edgy MD
    Yeah, good one. The credits thank The B-52's* at the end. The Zevon case is illustrative. There are situations where filmmakers don't like a commissioned song and drop it from the cut and the musician releases it anyhow, and even produces a video without footage from the film, which is the big advantage of such songs. Two I can recall are "Romancing the Stone" (in which only a few instrumental bars of Eddie Grant's failed title song appear, and Crosby, Stills, & Nash's "Wargames," which ended up on the cutting room floor of the film that it was commissioned for. *In 2008, the band long known as The B-52's dropped the apostrophe and now refer to themselves as The B-52s.
  19. Edgy MD
    The Kids Are All Right (2010) The Kids Are All Right (2009) Some Kind of Wonderful (1987)
  20. Edgy MD
    Ceetar wrote: metsmarathon wrote: i think the mo's zone is fine. lame name, but i like it. if they modify the walls and fences, i hope the essence of the zone remains. Everyone would've built Citi Field differently. Because it's so new we find ourselves second-guessing the Mets opinion on what it should be and look like. I wonder if people in 1964 questioned Shea? or even the name Mets? I bet there were people that wanted them to be called the Dodgers, or the Atlantics or something. Yeah, I'm pretty sure that if the walls were shifted to Shea's dimensions tomorrow, few would consider it done with. Though, on the other matter, I think "Dodgers" was taken.
  21. Edgy MD
    Merged.
  22. Edgy MD

    The Dish

    Edgy MD replied to a topic in Film Review Forum

    I thougth I arlready polled this baby. Seemed like the sort of film that gets and extra star due to the national pride folks take to it. Sweet and decent, though.
  23. Edgy MD
    So ceetar, marathon, and I are together on this. New dimensions are not so damaging as new dimension paranoia.
  24. Edgy MD
    batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: I left out that Edgy's post assumes that the distribution of all of Wright's batted balls (location/distance/speed of ball) essentially was unchanged after the Mets moved to Citi. But Wright likely altered his swing to compensate for the dramatic differences in the dimensions of Shea and Citi, thus changing Wright's distribution of batted balls. No, no it doesn't. It assumes very clearly that he has made alterations. The numbers in the first paragraph represent what the damage might look like if it was due to the dimensions alone.
  25. Edgy MD
    batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy DC wrote: I also think Howard Johnson's been an enabler, trying to help him adjust to he new situation. I mean, the guy was hitting what? About eight homers to right center per season at Shea? How much damage can Citi really do? Two or three of those homers still go out, two or three become outs, and two or three become doubles. Is that worth screwing up your swing over? Because the acknowledgment that he's knowingly screwed up his swing is the real story here. But it wasn't simply losing two HR's; Wright hit 10 in '09. And how many of Wright's can of corns over the last two years were the result of simply trying to compensate or adjust to Citi Field? Only Wright would know, if anyone. I didn't say he simply lost two homers. And I did make clear that my position is that he shouldn't try to compensate, and that the real damage to his performance isn't done by the dimensions, but by trying to compensate for them.
×
×
  • Create New...