RealityChuck

d'Kong76 wrote: The other is, "Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded." That wasn't Yogi. It was attributed to movie producer Sam Goldwyn in the 1930s. Whether Goldwyn actually said it is another issue; like Yogi, there were many things attributed to him that he never said.

My favorite Yogi Berra story was one where he wasn't actually involved in, but which shows how Yogi's luck worked. It was during the winter meetings in the early 60s -- possibly 1961. Stan Isaacs was a columnist for Newday, and part of a group of young sportswriters nicknamed "The Chipmunks." Bored one afternoon, they decided to Isaacs and the others decided to start their own trade rumor. They decided to spread the story that the Yankees were working on a trade with the Giants: Yogi Berra for Giants catcher Tom Haller. They knew that was preposterous on the face of it, so they threw in a twist: The Giants wanted Berra so he could take over as manager. The Chipmunks laughed at the very idea. They loved Yogi, but the idea of him being considered for a managing position seemed absurd. But the rumor got spread. Isaacs said that it was the first time anyone had ever considered Berra as a manager. Three years later, the Yankees gave him the job.

Yogi was everyone's favorite baseball personality. It wasn't just the malapropisms, but he looked so much like a regular guy, and was just so goddamned likable. He played (left field, BTW) in the first baseball game I ever attended. The Las Vegas Sun made a classic typo, listing him as "Yogi Bear" in their obituary (probably fixed by now).

Mets � Willets Point wrote: His name sounds like a kid who went to an exclusive prep school. Or the secret identity of a 40s superhero.

Edgy MD wrote: Mets playing in the AFL this year will be assigned to the Salt Lake Rafters. Is that Salt Lake as in Utah, or is there a Salt Lake in Arizona, too? I figured these teams were all based around the same area as the Spring Training complexes.It's the Salt River Rafters. They play in Scottsdale. The Salt River flows through Phoenix.

On, please. On this board???? There's no question of what to show:

[youtube:39motecu]LVf5Cr4M-F8[/youtube:39motecu]

Ceetar wrote: Farmer Ted wrote: Did the Mets have to pay to open that 5-day window. That kinda shit ain't free. Nah, it was more a mutually agreed upon thing, and was mostly a MLB rule exemption. Probably helped knowing someone on the rules committee. It's no-brainer. Cespedes gives up nothing tangible and gets another team bidding. Win for him. The interesting point is that he was willing to do it. It means that he is not unhappy playing with the Mets. If he disliked the situation, he wouldn't have waived the clause.

Don't worry. Just look up Mickey Stanley in 1968. So there's always Lagares.

I've been around for all of the Mets' pennant races, but 1969 sticks out the most. In 73 I was in college and battling mononucleosis, so I missed most of the race. BTW, it looks like the team will be keeping up its streak of making the playoffs in every decade of its existence.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/back-to-school

Let's face it. It's Washington. Most experts in the spring thought the Mets were pretty much a .500 team, with a chance of maybe getting a wild card if things broke right. The team was pretty much what people thought it would be on July 30: 52-50. But the Nationals were only three games better. On paper, they should have been running away with the division. Then the Mets got Cespedes, Flores started hitting, and d'Arnaud and Wright came back. Johnson was an big pickup, and Clippard fixed some bullpen problems. But the Nationals underperformed all year, so that when the Mets started putting it together, they couldn't keep up. The sweep in Citi caused them to start panicking and pressing. That series was their Black Cat game, and suddenly the Mets were in their heads.

I've been a fan of DeGrom since he came up. Maybe it's the hair. I do know that when I had a chance to go to my first Mets game in over 30s, I waited until he pitched (not well, but he didn't get the loss). And it's hard not to love Wilmer Flores. Who among us didn't shed tears for the Mets?

Back in August, it struck me that the Nationals sounded a lot like the 1969 Cubs. "We're not panicking." "Just wait until that final series."

It's so strange watching a Mets team that can score late.

I figured this would happen. Cespedis loses nothing by waiving the clause.

Did anyone here actually read what Harvey said? Here it is: �I�m going to always play, but like I said, I hired Dr. Andrews to do my surgery and I hired Scott for a reason and that�s to prolong my career and put me in the best possible position,� Harvey said before the Mets faced the Marlins on Saturday. �Moving forward with that I have one start in mind and that�s Tuesday [against Washington]. �I�m the type of person I never want to put the ball down. I hired Scott and went with Dr. Andrews because I trusted them to keep my career going and keep me healthy,� Harvey said. �As far as being out there, being with my teammates and playing, I�m never going to want to stop, but as far as the surgeon and my agent having my back and kind of looking out for the best of my career they�re obviously speaking their mind about it.� (italics added) This may be the most noncommittal answer in the history of sports. But there's one very important thing left out: that he was going to follow Boras's and Andrews's advice on innings. It clearly sounds like a statement where he doesn't agree with Boras and also doesn't want to mess up their working relationship. It's also obvious from the italicized portion that he's dissociating himself from Boras's statement. It's also untrue that Harvey was unhappy about the six-man rotation. He made a comment to the effect that it messed up his routine, but never indicated that he was against the idea. The entire affair is just a way for the tabloids to sell newspapers. The facts are that Harvey wants to pitch and is not talking about shutting himself down.

Ashie62 wrote: MFS62 wrote: themetfairy wrote: On Wednesday's The Daily Show Jon Stewart just referenced the Nolan Ryan for Jim Fregosi trade. Still painful to hear. Later As bad as that was, I think of Amos Otis for Joe Foy. Joe passed away at age 46. Here is an article about Joe's career and adult struggles. http://sabr.org/bioproj/person/0cc84530I agree. The Mets had refused to give up Otis for Joe Torre a year before that, so they know what they had. And there isn't anyone in 1971 who didn't think the Mets had made a great trade in getting Fregosi. He looked at the time to be a borderline Hall of Famer; Ryan kept getting worse every year (even modern advanced statistics show this). Ryan turned things around; Fregosi got injured and the trade just didn't work out, but it cannot be faulted given the information at the time

"Addison Reed" sounds like the secret identity of a 40s comic book hero. "By day, Addison Reed is a rich playboy, but by night, he fights crime as Fireman!"

Gee won't be called up. He's not on the 40-man roster, which is stuffed pretty full right now.

As I mentioned elsewhere (and it's still true), there has only been one day since July 31 where the Nationals gained ground on the Mets.

Rockin' Doc wrote: In Washington, the Padres just finished off their 6-5 conquest of the Nationals.So far this month, there has only been one day when the Nationals gained ground on the Mets.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Did Puello's release free up a spot on the 40-man roster?No. He was on the DL, so the spot didn't count.

Not that it has any effect this year, but Cesar Puello has been released. http://metsblog.com/metsblog/mets-release-cesar-puello/