RealityChuck

I'm not sure if Trachsel is able to pitch out of the bullpen -- he may take too long to warm up and be only useful as a mop-up man. But there's no need to renew his contract. The team has better, younger options.

The must-see films on the list are: The Maltese Falcon Beat the Devil (not that great a film, but you still shouldn't miss it) The Man Who Would Be King Treasure of the Sierra Madre

Well, I was a Yankees fan once. But I have an excuse: the Mets didn't exist at the time (and the Dodgers and Giants had left town). But after the 64 series, I decided the Mets were more fun.

And was done before that with Lily Tomlin.

I was in a home movie with my father and mother, who were in Sweet Liberty (1986)* with Bob Hoskins, who was in Balto (1995) with Kevin Bacon, giving me a Bacon number of 3. *As extras; you can spot my father just behind Alan Alda when they freeze frame Alda in the closing credits.

SteveJRogers wrote: = SC = 1936 (Year both Walter and Christy became the first pitchers in Cooperstown) No, they weren't. Ruth, Cobb, and Wagner also pitched in the majors.

Because They've Always Done It That Way. However, I suspect the reason was that, when subtitles started in B&W, that would put the white titles atop the bright sky in any outdoor scene, making them unreadable. And they wouldn't be subtitles then; they'd be supertitles. If you want them that way, you can always go to the opera.

MFS62 wrote: ]Glavine's left middle finger and index finger were diagnosed in 1990 with Raynaud's, a condition caused by poor circulation that leads to numbness and coldness. I'm shocked that he wasn't put on a medication program when that was first diagnosed. Because non-drug treatments are preferred in most cases: http://www.niams.nih.gov/hi/topics/raynaud/ar125fs.htm (Note the importance of exercising regularly. Glavine shouldn't have problems with that part. ) Drugs are generally only used when the phenomenon (it's called that, not a disease or a syndrom) is caused by connective tissue disease.

Johnny Dickshot wrote: If Darren Oliver takes even a single start, we'll need another reliever. I don't understand why people get bent out of shape every time the Mets try out a reliever. If he suxxxx, then he suxxx. BFD.Excellent point. If you can pick up a player who has had success in the past for cheap, how does it hurt? If he's good, great; if he's terrible, what's wrong with giving it a shot? A lot depends on the PTBNL, but it's worth taking a chance. Sometimes things work out (e.g., Valentin); sometimes they don't (e.g., Lima Bean). But there are no guarantees.

SteveJRogers wrote: I mean, Davey went to two full time starters for long relief and only used Sisk as a mop-up guy in the postseason! That says alot in terms of faith in a guy. Not really: you always have an extra starter or two in the postseason if you have a five-man rotation, and it makes sense to use him as long relief. In 1969, the team used Nolan Ryan in long relief for that reason. In '86, you also had Sid Fernandez -- a lefty who gave up a lot of fly balls to left, which meant there was no way you were going to start him in Fenway Park. So you start out with your two best (Gooden and Darling) at home, but then go to Ojeda (who, though lefty, had been succesful in Fenway). Since Ojeda pitched so well in game 3, it's sensible to go with him for game 6, with Sid ready in case of trouble. Looking at Sisk's record, 1985 was an anomaly: his worst year in as a regular. But he was at least average in '86, and if anyone seems to be at the bottom of Davy Johnson's list in '86, it was Randy Neimann, who never pitched in the postseason (Sisk did twice, even if it was for mop-up -- and his appearance in Game 4 of the NLCS was hardly that, since the team was only two runs down).

Edgy DC wrote: ="cleonjones11"]We could have Mota AND Nady ..Thanks Omar.... And a bag of money. But, you know, not Roberto Hernandez and Oliver Perez and a Player to Be Named Later. What's the point?They need Heath Bell down in Norfolk. This lets him stay there.

="SteveJRogers"]j/k That was based on a WEEI host suggesting that the when Mets traded David Cone to the Blue Jays for a PTBNL (not sure if it was Kent or Thompson off hand) that Cone could in fact become the PTBNL in his own tradeDo these young kids no nothing about Mets history?

Zvon wrote: I guess all the talk of Castros death have been greatly exaggerated. He pitches a 1-2-3 iniing for the Phils.Much like the death of Franco.

Too early to panic. Do you know that, with the three wins in a row, the Phillies are exactly as far behind the Mets are they were ten games ago? Pedro on the DL will mean he's in top shape in October. And the bad hitting is not just the corner OF -- the entire lineup (except for Reyes) is slumping. They'll get it back eventually. Plus Cliff will be back for the playoffs.

Nymr83 wrote: ] He is a native of Parlin, N.J., and grew up a fan of both the Mets and the Yankees, but once he was signed, the Yankees hat was soon tossed from his collection. what does "tossed" mean here? he'll have to burn it or otherwise permanently get rid of it before i will like him. keeping it but not wearing it won't do. He probably can't just throw it away -- the laws against dumping toxic waste are quite strict. You wouldn't want it to get into the water.

I don't mind retiring numbers, but I think you need to do it judiciously. I'd rather consider retiring numbers that get associated with a player who's with the team longer than Hernandez and Carter. Number 5, maybe (eventually), for instance.

I refuse to watch anything by Oliver Stone. Did so once, but only because my daughter rented it for school (History of Vietnam).

Great obscure fact about the Monkees TV show: It won the Emmy for outstanding comedy series in 1967, beating out Bewitched, Get Smart, Hogan's Heroes and Andy Griffith

The Mets could rarely afford to keep a player in the minors when he was ready, even if that ruined his ROY chances.

Willets Point wrote: Same here. I recall Doc being an excellent starting pitcher at least through 1991 and any dropoff in performance from his phenomenal 1985 to 1986 is just the natural order of things. I see. So making changes in how you pitch has no effect on your performance?

It's giving up too much for too little. Hernandez may be OK for another year, but Nady could have been set for awhile. Also, the team now has to resign Cliff Floyd for next year.

That was a great one. My only problem with it was slowing it down enough. Just a great pennant race: going into the final day, three teams were in it: Red Sox and Twins tied (and playing each other), and the Tigers a half game back (and playing a double header). I watched the Red Sox on TV that weekend and saw Yazstremski and Lomborg pull it out.

The race is set properly, but the standings on the right have the current name for the team. This is still a beta version, and I suspect they'll be told about the issue.

Watch the pennant races as they unfold: http://www.baseballrace.com/default.asp 1969 is particularly fun. Some of the older ones are fun: the team designations on the standings are not always right; for instance it looks like the Oakland A's won the AL flag in 1914

First of all, some movies serve as an EXTENSION of a TV series, sometimes to cash in on a hit show, or sometimes to revive a show, or to finish off a series, or provide a coda for it, or to expand a skit or cartoon into a full story. They generally include original cast members and are usually made and released in the same era as the TV show. These are sequels and spinoffs, not remakes, and include such movies as: - Spinoffs ... DR. WHO & DALEKS **½, Not really a spinoff: They just reshot the script (much like they did with The Quatermass Xperiment and sequels). BBC TV shows were short lived, so they would make a movie with the same script for those who missed it, and to try to market it in the US. It was a remake of the story, much like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. And wherever you put Doctor Who and the Daleks, you need to put the Quatermass films: The Quatermass Xperiment, Quatermass 2, and Quatermass and the Pit. They were exactly the same thing: movie versions of episodes of a TV miniseries (long before the term "miniseries" was coined). I've only seen the first, and it was an very good film.