Jump to content
Grand Central Mets
  • Create Account

LWFS

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    2,000
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

New York Mets News, Rumors & Analysis

New York Mets Videos

2026 New York Mets Top Prospect Rankings

New York Mets Trade & Free Agent Rumors

New York Mets Fan Guides & Resources

2026 New York Mets Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by LWFS

  1. I mean, if you want to do this in ADDITION to a regular-season/pennant situation, like soccer leagues do with domestic cup competitions, then, sure. Otherwise, nnnnnnnope.
  2. God, if that uppercut/see more pitches thing he was trying had worked, just a little. We would have had ourselves the Kiermaier we thought we did.
  3. Edgy MD wrote: I haven't followed this closely, but if this transfer was supposed to be taking place in stages over time, am I correct in assuming that Cohen was intending to finance the team rather than paying out of pocket? See, it sounds silly, but you don't know the whole deal. He knows this guy who can promise 46 percent returns, monthly. And you can withdraw at any time
  4. Oddly, Mets things are one of the few areas of interest I have that I DON'T pursue into podcasts. I've toe-dipped into Effectively Wild. Wifey Watch-- as presently constructed-- would be, like, a TERRIBLE thing to put out on blast for outside consumption.
  5. Dang. If memory serves, I feel as if he saved more Gee and Niese bacon than any other Met pitchers'.
  6. Everybody's got a Donnie Hart Everybody's got a Donnie Hart Replacement-level mop-up or start Everybody's got a Do-o-onnie Hart
  7. More data points-- by Tweet or by "brutally honest" ballot or by numeracy of award show results-- SHOULD lead to better guesses/fewer real surprises, right?
  8. Lefty Specialist wrote: =86dreamer post_id=31395 time=1581359856 user_id=97] agree that the consolidated entity including SNY is likely profitable. But not hard to imagine the baseball club losing money if they are not receiving full market value for the broadcasting rights from SNY. Wilpons are trying to sell the expense vehicle and keep the revenue vehicle. Precisely. I'm not so sure someone will pony up the money they're looking for without SNY. The Cohen deal was kind of like having your cake and eating it too, plus eating someone else's cake.
  9. I'd say it's artistic-cum-commercial protectionism, only the Academy has always been pretty cool with BRITISH (and other English-speaking) foreigners grabbing some of that shine. Xenophobia is closer to the thing, probs, with a healthy dash of favoritism. That may seem unduly harsh, unless you've ever seen some of the Hollywood Reporter's https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/brutally-honest-oscar-ballot-irishman-was-boring-tarantino-amazing-1275576Brutally Honest Oscar ballots: Parasite is beautifully done, but it didn't hold up the second time, and I don't think foreign films should be nominated with the regular films... I liked 1917 and Sam Mendes' direction, but I thought Quentin did a great job, and I want an American director to win. The Oscars is an American thing; English things win BAFTAs and the French vote for the French, and Quentin Tarantino should be honored for a great American movie... I didn't like American Factory — when the Chinese boss says "We're better than them" and they show the American workers as big fat slobs, I thought to myself, "Why is Obama attaching himself to this?" [Higher Ground, the production company run by Barack and Michelle Obama, is behind the film.] The Cave and For Sama were basically the same movie with different characters.
  10. It was. It won there as well. I've never been under the impression that the two categories were mutually exclusive, at least not by letter-of-law. They do seem to have been previously regarded as such by the voting body.
  11. FWIW, I thought that score WAS great. 120 minutes of slow, seeping aural dread.
  12. Just being glib-- more of a "joke"-related way to ask the "what'd you think" question without tipping my hand. For instance, I might have poisoned the well had I asked, "What other movies traversed the same plot beats and/or thematic ground as this stylish but ultimately empty pastiche, but did so first, and far more meaningfully*," or "Was Joaquin Phoenix the best actor in a film this year, or did he just do the MOST acting in a film this year?" *For my money: TAXI DRIVER (of which this is basically the airplane-plastic-cup version of the same basic cocktail recipe), KING OF COMEDY, YOU WERE NEVER REALLY THERE, and BRONSON. Off the top of my head.
  13. Was watching with the kid, so I couldn't shut it off. It was better than the shopworn premise. thanks to the charm of some of the leads. Which isn't saying all that much.
  14. Girl, bye
  15. "Our guy's hit his number several times," LWFS' representatives asserted. "This time, he's eating his way past it in the best pace of his life." [What the hell am I even paying these guys for, really?]
  16. "Hitting instructor" is someone who shows your game aunt or drunk uncle how not to hurt herself/himself in the sports complex's batting cage. It's a hitting coach.
  17. FINALLY caught this movie. Or, rather, I caught the version of this movie with this particular title, since it, well, kinda felt like I'd seen this movie before. What'd you think? Funny ha-ha? Funny observant and resonant? Or funny like week-old-fish smells?
  18. Finally saw JOKER. In terms of carrying the weight, Phoenix was like LeBron on the Cavaliers team that forced him to initially leave the Cavaliers. In terms of everything else... well, the production design was really good, for aping Martin Scorcese slavishly, and... well. It ain't my favorite.
  19. Even his FAMILY doesn't trust him to nurture/guide their golden-goose/family business. Why on earth would anyone else? Unless... wait, are they shopping this to people with brain injuries? They should shop this to people with brain injuries.
  20. The Red Sox might be concerned that they can't compete with the Yankees in the last year they'll have Betts, in which case trading Betts makes some sense. But they won't take their time rebuilding, so they probably don't really want prospects unless they will graduate this year. And I'm guessing they'd want established major leaguers under control for at least three years; trading one year of Betts for two years of Thor, one of which they'd be punting, doesn't sound like a fit to me. Verdugo is close to established; he entered the 2019 as a top-20 overall prospect and had a .294/.342/.475 line in over 300 ABs in his rookie year. The Red Sox get five seasons of him, and he is only 23. They also get another 2019 top-50 overall prospect who graduated this past season (the Sox get six seasons of him), although he is still a work in progress. But they are quite a bit better primed for next year, which I expected was the objective. And they could always get Betts back. The Dodgers have a farm system (in addition to the payroll) that makes the loss easy to absorb, and they get a guy who is perfectly capable of pushing them over the top. Verdugo is also possessed of https://www.mlb.com/news/alex-verdugo-back-injury-issuesback issues which cost him most of the 2019 season's past two months.
  21. =Ceetar post_id=31117 time=1580924720 user_id=102] BIG good-faith concession? haha.
  22. Mookie Betts is, like, maybe the best player-- in terms of current/future value-- to EVER be traded in baseball. I'd be, um... not happy, were I a Sox guy.
  23. Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: I also thought again about the initial announcement which came from the Mets side (did Cohen ever have a statement?) It was an oddly specific about the 5-year thing for a deal "in negotiation" He was reportedly (Post, IIRC?) planning an Opening Day party/announcement. Assuming the Post report is at all accurate, I'd be pissed, too, if I had agreed in principle to an expensive, baroque deal in which I make a BIG good-faith concession, and the other party asks for a little more adjusting at the 11th hour.
  24. LOVE his other stuff that I've seen (The Host, Snowpiercer). As it's non-stream, still haven't managed to see this one.
  25. CRAZY charming. The meta stuff helped make the movie for me. Gerwig makes really interesting choices, and is getting much stronger as a filmmaker. Ronan is the kind of actress who elevates terrible material to memorably-good, and stuff that's good, she takes to special places. She's great in this. (I liked Chalamet, too, in the oft-thankless role of Laurie.) I was slightly less hot on Watson-- who was amiable enough, but seemed dropped in from a different family-- and Pugh, who had the unenviable task of playing 12 as an adult.
×
×
  • Create New...