metsmarathon

that's not at all what i'm questioning. what i'm questioning is that: a) peterson's track record is shitty peterson claimed to be able to do anything more than correct a minor mechanical flaw in victor zambrano's delivery in 10 minutes.

SteveJRogers wrote: Granted Peterson's track record (i.e. 10 minutes with Zambrano) is shitty..., i thought both ends of that statement had already been debunked...?

i'm gonna go with option three... also, "whatever it takes" is just silly. there whould always be an upper limit to what you are willing to pay. since you presumably are responsible for the one vote for whatever it takes, what if it took $52.7 M per season, plus all fans in attendance on the day that zito pitches would be required to wear only burlap sacks or be turned away by security guards armed with stun guns and trained weasels? you'd be already on record as signing up for those terms.

so i decided to relook at my voting in this mets MVP thing, comparing my "metsmarathon patented overlycomplicated schaeffer player of the game voting system" totals to a completely seat-of-the-pants subjective voting. score schaeffer voting off the top of my head 10 Beltran Beltran 9 Reyes Reyes 8 Wright Wright 7 Delgado Delgado 6 Glavine Glavine 5 Martinez Valentin 4 Trachsel Wagner 3 OHernandez OHernandez 2 Valentin Martinez 1 Oliver Sanchez i'm not sure which of these i like better for going forward... i don't think that trachsel was more valuable than el duque... but maybe he was... quality versus quantity, and all that. off the top of my head, i think i valued quality moreso than quantity, while my spreadsheet seems to go the other way... for now, lets just pretend the spreadsheet is right.

i'm not sure if i'm hoping for a game 5... i want to go to a playoff game, and im not sure if i dont still have to pay for the ticket even if there's no game, but i don't think i would want the stress that a 5th game in the NLDS would induce...

i'm not sure that an airline tie-in would have a positive effect on stadium food.

(for yancy)

wagner too.

well, based on my schaeffer voting, which has only been updated to 19 September, the following is my MVP voting... Beltran 10 Reyes 9 Wright 8 Delgado 7 Glavine 6 Martinez 5 Trachsel 4 Ohernandez 3 Valentin 2 Oliver 1 maine could overtake oliver, but wags is well out of the money here. i really seem to undervalue saves, don't i?

if you're naming names just for the sake of naming names, truth be damned, why include brian roberts and david segui? if you're naming names just for the sake of throwing false accusations out there, isn't it lucky of you to name a guy who comes clean on his own, and has signed affadavits from doctors who'd given him prescriptions for actual medical conditions? or was the inclusion of david sequi, who would admit to HGH use, and brian roberts, who nobody gives a rats ass about, part of some marterful strategizing so as to lend credibility to the clemens, tejada, and pettitte assertions? i find that harder to believe than what is being put out there as the truth.

aren't the fan and sny boradcast partners anyways? why does there need to be any more drama surrounding this than two broadcasting partners pooling their resources in such a fashion as may bring additional enjoyment to die-hard mets fans?

aren't the fan and sny boradcast partners anyways? why does there need to be any more drama surrounding this than two broadcasting partners pooling their resources in such a fashion as may bring additional enjoyment to die-hard mets fans?

i've gotta pay more attention to these things. i ignored my way to 9th place (so far), but i'm trying to make a tltl push for 8th!

its the braves' until some other NL east team shows it's capable of making the playoffs. or until someone with more clout than i says so.

="Gwreck"]Chavez LF LoDuca C Beltran CF Delgado 1B Valentin 2B Franco 3B Tucker RF Woodward 2B Maine P wow. we're playing the whole game with an infield shift? how innovative of willy!

its off topic, but most of the time, francessa sounds like more of a yankee suckup than kay does. and i really don't think too many of us would really care what the yankees did. if anything, bringing in any guest announcer would be an improvement from what they have currently on the radio. they'd deserve to be commended. i hardly think, too, that cohen demanded to be put on the air during the playoffs. and even if he did, what leverage does he hold over WFAN anyways? its not like tom mccarthy is getting shut out of the playoffs, right? he still gets to do everything but one innings' worth of work in the middle of the game, right? i don't see what the big deal is. not one bit. also, does mccarthy get paid by the inning, or something? its not like cohen is taking food off of tom's table. an addition to the booth is an addition to the broadcast, as far as this situation is concerned.

so... the most he's taking from anybody is an inning in the middle fo the game, and i'm supposed to believe this is some huge unfair controversy about who initiated it and why, while just about every mets fan who would listen to the game on the radio is happier as a result? yawn.

those poor yankees having to get by relying on only derek jeter, jason giambi, alex rodruguez, johnny damon...

the toe is about the only injury that i think would have happened to him if he were still on the sox. the other injuries he's sustained are more likely a matter of chance than anything else. the sox were stupid not to resign him, or, at the very least, not to replace him.

hey, at least this isnt the kind of injury that should affect him adversely next year.

]Bring Your Beard nttawwt

wow. humber aside, heilman has the lowest ERA of any metly pitcher in september

its better to slump at the end of the season when you're already in the postseason, than once the postseason actually starts. provided you get out of said slump that is. as a corollary, slumps don't last forever.

maybe this should be split from here... i dunno... but i was in a procrastinatey mood just now, and i decided to look at how momentum has affected the mets this year - are tehy more or less likely to win a game following a win, or lose a game following a loss, than you would expect based on their record for the season? so i took the mets winning percentage = 93 / (93+64) = 0.592; and a corresponding losing percentage of 0.408 i then tallied up all of the mets' wins and losses follong wins or losses, respectively, in the previous game what i found out was that the mets won 54 games after having won the previous game, and lost 25 games after having lost the previous game. (they also won 39 games after losing the previous game, and likewise lost 39 games after having won the previous game.) so, how does that compare to what we'd expect? well, the mets had 92 opportunities thus far this season to win a game after having won the prior game (the first game they won would have no predecessor), and the mets also had 63 opportunities to lose a game after having lost the game previous (the first game they lost would have no predecessor) if we multiply 92 opportunities by a 0.592 winning percentage, we find that, statistically, the mets would have been expected to win 54.496 games after having won the game prior. if we multiply 63 opportunities by a 0.408 losing percentage, we find that, statisticall, the mets would have been expected to lose 25.68 games after having won the game prior. 54.496 versus the actual 54 25.68 versus the actual 25 what this tells me, based, admittedly, on this very small sample size, is that "momentum" has played no role in the mets season, and wether the team has won (or lost) the game prior offers no indication as to their liklihood of winning (or losing) their next game. further study is of course warranted.

wow. jose reyes, three-hitter. what sal must think...