metsmarathon

The season is doomed if we don’t win this thing!

Wow, kimbrels been around longer than I thought. XD

Kimbrel feels like a hofer based on how unfathomably dominant he was with the braves. I feel like he’s probably had the depth of career to warrant it but relievers are tricky. I’m also positing this without looking at a single stat, so what do I know…

so like, what would you be looking at in terms of a re-name?

do we really have 40 active members? wow, that seems... high. I certainly come across as a little bit anti-growth, but cheez whiz, i feel like this forum is probably one or two key members away from shutting the doors for good. that scares the **** outta me. i find it hard to believe that if we were to suddenly throw in with mr brock beuachamp - if that is your real name - that the forum would instantly grow to thousands of idiots overnight. i'd be curious what the graphs of the other sites he's.... running(?)... would look like, but if it's steady growth then that ain't all bad. I'd be shocked if we were instantly inundated with waves and waves of mets fans. shocked. i mean, the first few visitors would certainly be leery of dipping their toes into the water. what with all us naked hill people swimming around. and no doubt we'd do our best to scare them off if they felt like they didn't belong. morons would take one look at this place and thing we weren't cool enough. but i like to think that the more thoughtful fans out there who might be actually interested in partaking in an old-school forum might be inclined to sit and stay a while, and maybe discuss the nuanced differences between fWAR and bWAR, or chat up how underappreciated lance johnson or mike cameron were, and that's ok by me. heck, maybe one day i dust off a certain skate key and a certain little WPA-lovin' tin box full of springs, cogs, and discarded vcr parts (sorry that's a lot of backstory) can find kinship with another probably made-up internet identity that may or may not actually be an axe-murderer (more backstory)... look, let's not all act like we don't take a look around each time we log onto this precious little corner of the world wide web and think to ourselves, how the everloving **** is this place still here!? it ain't gonna be around forever, if we don't try to do something. even if that something carries some risk. and... y'know... if somebody wanted to go ahead and scope out sergioferrarcompanion-dot-com as a super-secret doomsday backup plan that probably wouldn't be the worst idea, either. just in case... seriously. i was basically youngest among us when this place started out - well, at least after i was invited over from the dark place in the earliest of days - and much as i hate to say it, fifty looms large in the near future. i ain't a kid anymore. and i'm pretty sure i'm still on the younger side of the median age here. we gotta do something to keep this place vital.

Is Nate lavendar dark horseable?

I think the real important question is, would we be bringing back the annual song parody contest? And… these prospective new users that could be brought in to liven things up… are they any good at wordle? Because the competition is already too damn stiff over here. Jeez.

Quite coincidentally, the other day my kid - ummR for the record - asked me what the cranepoolforum was and why I was so often on it. And in the process of explaining what it is and how it had come to be I marveled quite a bit that it has managed to persist as long as it has, however small and concentrated it’s current membership is.

I thought he was related to Tim Kohler, based on the avatar. Welcome abordick. It’s interesting prospect to consider wrt opening up the gates to a wider audience, seeing as historically we’d secreted ourselves away from a larger forum that had grown unwieldy (and decidedly least common denominator). I’d love for this forum to be more lively - and to become a home base for even more interesting and intelligent metly discussions and analysis. But how would we ever get the rabble caught up to all of our inbred hill people history? Will there be a mandatory onboarding process? We’d need people to understand where the hell all of us came from - and why the hell we are the way we are. And, of course, they must be forced to hold us in the required high esteem.

It’s kind of a silly thing to make a point of - but since it seems to be a thing that needs a point made about it, I like the point that was made. As much as we appreciate David wright as captain, and feel that it can be quite meaningful, I think pointedly NOT having a captain is perhaps more meaningful. Basically cohen is saying that he doesn’t want the role of leadership to fall only upon the one designated guy. But rather that each player can be, and is, a leader in their own way and in their own time. That a successful team shouldn’t me looking to that ONE GUY to carry them through the dark times but that they should all look inward to ask what they can do as leaders among men to take on and share the burden. And since it appears - reportedly and rumouredly - that the potential captainship was a point of fission in the clubhouse last year, then doing away with it pointedly is the right thing to do. Enough of that ********. Etc.

No no. I’d much rather freak out about this. It’s important.

Is Ronny Mauricio an option to fill in at shortstop while Francisco is out?

i think my first mets game was in 86 (or maybe 87), so there's a pretty good chance that i saw carter. no clue who they might've been playing against though. coulda been 85...

Jett for me, though it was getting harder to see a pathway for him here. I’m excited for him to get a shot, and Milwaukee seems like just the right spot for him to get a lot of play. It was cool seeing his bat in the Louisville slugger museum when we went three years ago. I’d been hoping to see him use it for us. Oh well.

Jett and Sproat for peralta and something called Tobias myers, apparently.

hmm... i liked that acuna could fill in at short if need be. though i suppose that new guy we just recently got has had some experience there, so i guess its ok. ...we're not paying his whole salary are we...?

Well. I did not see that coming. I’d see if Baty can play 1st. Or, semien.

Bellinger is crazy inconsistent. If he plays well, he’s absolutely worth 30. This past season FanGraphs values his 4.4 war at $39M, and $36M in 2023. Unfortunately in between he posted a $16m season and had been coming off a three year stretch coming off his mvp wherein he logged a total of 2.0 fWAR. So… you don’t quite know who you’re going to get. At his best he’s at least as good as Tucker. Based on the Tucker valuation, I’d be ok with a $40M aav as the cost of doing business, with a similar 4-year structure to what they offered Tucker. Not 7. Or, actually, I’d prefer they do a similar thing but for framber, and then bring back bader, or some other of stopgap. I’m not as much concerned about our offense as the potential low floor (albeit high ceiling) of our current starting pitching staff

Well **** I’d much rather have bellinger than tucker, if that’s what it costs for tucker. Jeebus! Might be able to get framber too for that total cost.

I think I’m ok with that, if it pans out. He’d get paid quite well for three years, then comes off the books as all of our babies start hitting their arbitration years. Heckuva lineup with him, Soto, and Lindor, too.

Hmm.. didn’t know about the opt outs. Curious. I’d still be willing to run the risk of it. I do agree though that all the risk is on the club, but how do you square that particular circle?

****ing hell, I’d’ve done that in a heartbeat!

Rico brogna resonates for me….

I’d sign him to compete for a spot with benge and Williams, and cut him as soon as he didn’t… Or maybe just skip the part where we pay him altogether.

This feels like a fantabulously low return for a guy who’s bringing along a suitcase filled with $6m dollars or so, let alone a valuable offensive and defensive contribution.