metsmarathon

at least their team made a solid run at it, and forced hte winning team to operpay by a silly silly amount. but yeah, who saw the angels coming?! not me.

wowzers!

i was thinking hte exact opposite of this thought for hte brief moments i caught his presser yesterday. i would love to get jose reyes and pedro martinez in a room, talking at length about baseball, life, and more baseball.

Frayed Knot wrote: So with Angel gone who's going to be in charge of missing the cut-off men? duda. definitely duda.

Edgy DC wrote: I disagree. Very easy to go there. Well, I had hoped "for me" was clearly implied. You're rooting for him to succeed, that's fine. You're rooting for him to fail, that's fine. As far rooting for him to succeed because you want there to be no way in the universe that this was the better choice in the situation, because what's important is not that he succeeds or fails, but that Wilpon is most deeply tarnished, it's hard (for me) to go there. You go crazy. But that's not what I'm in this for. I'm totally down with the notion that there should be a higher limit for a career Met star. And I realize I don't have kids for whom Jos� Reyes on the Mets is a lifetime fixture. But that's a bridge too far for me. well, i want him to stay healthy and succeed and all that because i'd like to be right in that the mets hsould have retained him, or made a better effort in doing so. and since my being right would mean the wilpons would be bitterly wrong, it's like a bonus. the more right i am, the more wrong the wilpons are. and especially because i like jose reyes - no, i adore jose reyes - i want him to be successful no matter what pajamas he's wearing ,no matter how gaudy. and if hte wilpons are right in that jose reyes wasn't worth aggressively retaining, then it means that he was not as successful. and i wouldn't like that.

TransMonk wrote: My dream is that in 2017 the Mets win 110 games while the Marlins are paying Reyes $17M to be on the DL. Personally, I've been prepared for this for a while and am ready to move on. Right now, I'm fairly certain that I do not want, under any circumstances, for the Wilsons to be right here. I want Reyes to be a perrenial all-star and MVP candidate. Granted, I want for him to do It while playing on a last place team. or at least a second place team. I want Jose to build a hall of fame career and for this non-signing non-offer to forever be an indelible blemish upon the legacy of the entire fucking wilpon clan. I wish Jose all the best and look forward to cheering him each and every time the fish come to town.

Centerfield wrote: And you know what, if they weren't even going to make an offer, why didn't they trade him at the deadline? At least we'd have something to show for it. Six years at $17.5 a year is not unreasonable. If this was so far out of their range that they couldn't even get involved in the conversation, only an idiot would hold onto him. At the time, I remember thinking that the "Don't Trade Reyes" camp should have been more specific. They should have said "Don't Trade Reyes BUT MAKE SURE YOU CAN RE-SIGN HIM". Of course, I suppose that should have been evident and only an idiot would think otherwise. Fucking idiots. this. all of this. and then more of this.

well, i didn't expect him to come out and say "fuck the mets" his is an appropriate respone for a member of hte team. he's saying not that it isn't a big burden to replace reyes, but that the burden is shared by the whole team. i got no issue.

the handshakes, the clapping, the celebrating, the sliding, the everything.

SteveJRogers wrote: seawolf17 wrote: Edgy DC wrote: Kaat's kind of astonishing, no? I figured this was a three-man race among Hodges, Oliva, and Santo, with Minoso expected to be a respectable fourth. I'm disappointed in Hodges counted out, but I can accept an argument that places him behind Santo and Oliva. But Kaat? Kaat even came out himself and said he wasn't a HoFer; referred to himself as a number-three starter. Kaat has a ton of MFY friends in the right low places (Kay for example). Especially using the "same or lesser" arguments with guys like Sutton, Niekro, Blyleven, etc don sutton 70.8 career WAR, 17.1 3 yr peak phil niekro 96.8 career WAR, 24.3 3 yr peak blyleven 90.1 career WAR, 22.2 3 yr peak jim kaat 41.2 career WAR, 16.3 3 yr peak think about that. 40% of his value over his 25 year career came in that 3 year stretch. h

except in 1969, his first year on the ballot, no player who drew more HOF votes than gil hodges failed to eventually make the hall.

presuming anybody actually buys mets tickets next year, and subsequently cannot attend the games, i'm looking forward to getting some fucking sweet seats on stubhub this year.

well, at least they got santo right.

it's a no-brainer because of the pr value. i think that no matter what the mets do from here on out, barring some miracle, they've cut irrevocably deep into their season ticket base. i think the amount of money they just lost by fecklessly losing reyes will more than offset the money they would lose by overpaying him to sit on the dl.

did womack get on the ballot for leading the league in stolen bases? does black ink get you on automatically?

i console myself with this tought. if the marlins are going to go after pujols too, then it's likely that no matter the wilpon's financial situation, they would have been likely able to push the contract eventually to where we sandy would not want it to go. so maybe we never had a chance to begin with. it is little, bitter solace. fuck the mets. i'll probably change my mind come april, but really. fuck the mets.

Ceetar wrote: And I've got no problem if others find they can't root for him, although I think Michael Vick (and plenty of other characters across sports history) is a fair example of how ultimately these types of things are off the field news bytes and when it's go time, it's mostly forgotten. Particularly when you're winning. (Nevermind that 99% of Rays fans will never know about it, since most sports fans aren't paying attention to the personal life stuff) are you arguing about how most fans react (or how you perceive them to react) to criminals on tehir favorite teams, or how you yourself react to criminals on your favorite team? i think it's an important distinction. But maybe I'm just a callous person that doesn't really care about other people i don't know and/or assume everyone else I'm rooting for has probably done similar stuff and just didn't get caught. Not ruling that out. It's not really much different than what Johan Santana did, although presumably they were both sober and the evidence that she was unwilling in that case is seemingly less substantial, not that those things matter. i can't fully grasp what you're saying here, or maybe i don't want to. are you saying that since you don't know the history of all of your players, you can either assume they're all rapists or just dismiss those whose raping history you do discover? are you also saying that you find no discernable doifference between one case of rape and sodomy of a woman who was drunked up, which resulted in a honest to goodness criminal investigation and plea to / conviction of the crime of unlawful miprisonment with violence, and a (perhaps specious) case that was investigated and subsequently dismissed by the investigative body? there's a world of difference betweeen being guilty of a felony and being accused of one, especially when the accusation fails to amount to so much as a trial.

oh please. like none of you guys never accidentally and totally uncharacteristically raped a woman you barely knew and had gotten drunk. it happens to everybody, doesn't it? what's wrong with a guy raping a woman just that one time? it doesn't mean you're a bad guy, does it? why can't we just sweep it under the rug like drunk driving? they're not really major crimes anyway. just things they tell us not to do. like changing lanes without using your turn signal or tearing the tags off of mattresses.

wow. that's not a wholly unreasonable contract for a closer.

i don't see how you can vote for lee smith but not edgar martinez.

bagwell *palmeiro larkin walker martinez trammell raines *mcgwire

i'd look into having a mentor around, but not reaching for one financially. i think we can wait for one to come to us in that regard. it's way too early to give up on thole.

8th 3 top-five votes 80 total points

Ceetar wrote: Twitter abuzz with "Michael Young with a first place vote?!?" i have a really hard time understanding why anoyone would put michael young higher on their ballot than ian kinsler. i get that leading his team in hits and rbi is something good, but really, how could anyone look at the two of them and think young was the better or more valuable player this year? michael young got votes in every available spot. 1st through 10th. kinsler got no higher than 5th. i'm a little surprised that ellsbury didn't get it. i wonder what difference one win might've made for him.

if those stupid fucking rivaly series are retained, then this whole realignment would be a sorry sorry mess. i'm hoping that with all of the lip service about evening up the schedules, that they realize that the rivalry series undo all of that. i'm also really hoping that they do away with that thought of having a super fantastic interleague block where everybody gets to play an interleague game at the same time. fold the damned things into the schedule all random-like, treat them as any other game, and the issue will disappear. make a big deal about this being the one time the mets get to go to seattle for the next four years or so. fine. that shit's cool. but don't try to sell me on the rivalry week, or the interleague week. because then i can't watch any other rivalry games, or any other interesting interleague matchups. plus if you have one or two interleague games going on a t a given time, then you can always highlight those.