seawolf17

We'll be there on Sunday, courtesy of the incredible Gwreck. Looks like it'll be chilly but clear. Hoping we can squeeze MiniWolf in -- word on the street is that it's a 32" maximum to not need a ticket, but considering it's not a real game, we'll just have him act short. BabyGirl should be no problem. Kase and MK -- see you there? Buzz me at some point and we'll try to meet up. Anyone else?

In Burkhardt's defense -- as I'm trying to figure out Citi's policy on strollers for Sunday, it does say "no videocameras" on the Mets' site.

Oh, and you know what? I'm down with Sheffield. Bring it on, Gary! Welcome to the Mets! Make us proud!

="Edgy DC"]="Tom Singer / MLB.com"]The possibility of playing his home games within miles of Yankee Stadium might also appeal to Sheffield. What? "Well, the Giants were offering me a second year at $4 million guaranteed, but Mets were giving me a chance to be moderately near Yankee Stadium. I couldn't pass that up." WAIT. Did an actual paid sportswriter actually write that? Holy fuck. I am so sick of this Yankee-loving bullshit. You have got to be kidding me. Hey, Red Sox and Rays, put that on your fucking bulletin boards, in case you need any more reason to knock those fuckers back into third place where they belong.

And Brian Bruney, you're an overpaid tub of goo who can't find the strike zone with a guide dog who's lucky the Yankees wouldn't know pitching talent if it punched them in the neck, or you'd find yourself pitching for the Sioux City Sand Gnats. So shut the hell up and join Caveman on the Ass Line.

="Rockin' Doc":lhs13t5x]Damon should stick to doing Gieco commercials.[/quote:lhs13t5x] Seriously. That pissed me off. "I mean, really, fuck the little guy. I make $13 million a year, guaranteed. So I don't care if they can't afford tickets; I wipe my ass with $1,000 bills." Rockin' Doc Apr 03 2009 04:52 AM A 76.3% increase in the cost of the average ticket for a seat at Yankee Stadium is once again, proof positive that it sucks to be a Yankees fan. Johnny Damon, it seems safe to conclude, is not exactly a thinking man. His comments are insensitive and out of touch with the day to day struggles of the common working man or woman. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 05:51 AM ="Johnny Damon":1g3apd5t]"It's tough. New York can withstand it," he said. "Coming to this plush building, I think it's definitely something that people want to see. I mean, those are great seats. It's going to be tough for a family to afford but, you know, but we'll let the people upstairs worry about that."[/quote:1g3apd5t] Clearly, the people upstairs don't give a damn either. Nymr83 Apr 03 2009 06:18 AM In the post this morning Sherman says bad things about the New Yankee stadium while Kevin Kernan has some faint praise for Citi Field (though more dumping on Shea) soupcan Apr 03 2009 07:00 AM Times has its architectural reviews of both stadia today... ] April 3, 2009 Architecture Review Two New Baseball Palaces, One Stoic, One Scrappy By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF American stadium design has been stuck in a nostalgic funk, with sports franchises recycling the same old images year after year. Still, if you have to go with a retro look, New York City could have done worse than the new Yankee Stadium and Citi Field. Both were designed by Populous (formerly known as HOK Sport Venue Event) and are major upgrades over the stadiums they replaced, which had been looking more and more dilapidated over the years. Both should be fine places to spend a few hours watching a game. What�s more, each stadium subtly reflects the character of the franchises that built them. Yankee Stadium is the kind of stoic, self-conscious monument to history that befits the most successful franchise in American sports. The new home of the Mets, meanwhile, is scrappier and more lighthearted. It plays with history fast and loose, as if it were just another form of entertainment. Yankee management started talking about replacing the old stadium more than a decade ago, and this seemed to be the tougher challenge: the stadium sparkled with the memories of 26 World Series championships. Architecturally, however, the stadium was charmless. Renovation in the 1970s may have made it more comfortable (fans loathed the painful wooden seats of the original version), but it also destroyed many architectural features. The original copper frieze that lined the stadium�s upper deck was ripped out. (A partial concrete replica was added later.) The monuments that had once stood in the deepest recesses of center field were moved to an insipid space behind the left-center field fence and named Monument Park. The little personality the stadium had came from its site: a tight urban lot framed by elevated subway tracks on one side and a city park on the other. The new stadium, which stands across the street from the old one, spruces up that image while reviving some of the lost history. The towering arched windows that dominated the original exterior, an echo of the Roman Colosseum, have been recast in a mix of limestone, granite and cast stone, and they are as imposing as ever. A small urban plaza, raised just above the level of the sidewalk, faces the bars and souvenir shops along River Avenue and the entry to the elevated train, strengthening the structure�s relationship to its urban setting. The city has also promised to build a park and several ball fields just to the south of the stadium in an effort to put a more community-friendly face on the project. A broad pedestrian walkway will eventually link the stadium to the fields and a Metro-North station farther to the south. The biggest improvements, however, are the interiors, which have been organized with an eye to the fans. The concourses are broad open spaces, with concession stands set along the perimeter so that they don�t obstruct views down to the field. More seats are concentrated below the mezzanine level, closer to the action. Even the luxury suites, which suddenly look like a holdover from the era of corporate excess, are discreetly set back so that they don�t detract from the shared intimacy of watching the game. There�s history here, too, or at least a facsimile of it. The Yankees have brought back the old manually operated scoreboards in left and right field, a feature that was last used in the 1960s. A replica of the old frieze sits along the top of the upper deck. Best of all, the slot that separated the scoreboard from the right-field stands in the old stadium has been recreated, so you can still catch glimpses of the subway rumbling by � a reminder that the stadium has been carved out of the heart of a living, thriving city. All in all, the new Yankee Stadium may be an austere, even intimidating place, but there�s nothing tacky about it. It�s straightforward, paint-by-numbers architecture. Getting to Citi Field is a more drawn-out aesthetic experience. Descending from the elevated 7 train in Queens, you have to cross a wide landscaped plaza before arriving at the main entry gate. A sea of parking stretches out in both directions. A pile of rubble (once the old Shea Stadium) currently lies just beyond the parking to the left. The building fits comfortably in this setting. Yankee Stadium�s facade is dominated by vertical lines, which emphasize its monumentality. Citi Field�s facade, which is loosely modeled on Ebbets Field, the former home of the Brooklyn Dodgers, is more low-key. Its brick cladding gives it a warmth that Yankee Stadium doesn�t have. A pre-cast concrete band cuts across the arched exterior, breaking down the structure�s scale and emphasizing its horizontality. History also feels less heavy here. Like the Yankees, the Mets built broad concourses that open up to the field so that you feel close to the game even while you�re standing in line for a beer. But the design is far more eclectic. A porch that cantilevers out over right field is modeled on the old Tiger Stadium. Big steel trusses conjure the structure that supports the nearby elevated train. A soot-colored pedestrian bridge that spans the bullpen behind center field is a miniature version of the Hell Gate Bridge. Even the color of the seats � dark green � was copied from somewhere else: the Polo Grounds, where the New York Giants baseball team played and the Mets played their first two seasons. The casual mood is reinforced by a number of spaces that have little to do with watching a baseball game: an auditorium, a Wiffle ball field � even an event room for weddings or parties. What saves the design from becoming completely hokey, however, is its openness to the real world outside. Most of Queens, from the faded remnants of the 1964 World�s Fair to the Whitestone Expressway and the muddy waters of Flushing Bay, is visible from the main concourse level. Farther up, you can see the Manhattan skyline several miles away. The visitors� bullpen has a view of dilapidated garages and auto body shops across 126th Street to the northeast. The reality of this working-class landscape tempers the artificiality of the interior. Even so, most serious architects today strive to create buildings that reflect the values of their own era, not a nostalgic vision of the past, no matter how open they may be toward their surroundings. And in that regard both stadiums will be a disappointment to students of architecture. For us, the buildings are just another reminder of the enormous gap that remains between high design and popular taste. dinosaur jesus Apr 03 2009 07:12 AM ]Even so, most serious architects today strive to create buildings that reflect the values of their own era, not a nostalgic vision of the past, no matter how open they may be toward their surroundings. The whole game of baseball is a nostalgic vision of the past. What values of our own era do we really want to bring to it? Frayed Knot Apr 03 2009 07:20 AM I like the part where Hankenbrenner (or was it Hal-enbrenner?) says; 'yeah, we overpriced some of the seats and as a result they're not selling as well as we hoped ... but we didn't misread the market!' Umm, yeah ya did. In fact, that's kind of the definition of misreading the market. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 07:20 AM ="dinosaur jesus"]]Even so, most serious architects today strive to create buildings that reflect the values of their own era, not a nostalgic vision of the past, no matter how open they may be toward their surroundings. The whole game of baseball is a nostalgic vision of the past. What values of our own era do we really want to bring to it? I don't know enough about architecture to explain why I agree with that statement, but I do. I would rather the Mets had built a stadium the reflects early 21st Century architecture, whatever it is. Citi Field looks like a nice place to watch a game, and it's visually appealing, but it also has a Disney feel to it, like you're in "Baseball Land." soupcan Apr 03 2009 07:35 AM These two come to mind when I think about new stadiums with a modern bent. Target Field, which is the new stadium now being built for the twins in Minnesota. Nationals - Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 08:00 AM Glass façades and baseball go together like bleach and baby baths. Even if there's no real threat of the two actually coming together --- and even if the vulnerable element is reinforced against the dangerous element --- it creates an atmophere of anxiety. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 08:19 AM I kinda like the Minnesota park. The Nationals less so, but it's not bad either. soupcan Apr 03 2009 08:19 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 08:21 AM ="Edgy DC":292rjkrd]Glass fa�ades and baseball go together like bleach and baby baths. Even if there's no real threat of the two actually coming together --- and even if the vulnerable element is reinforced against the dangerous element --- it creates an atmophere of anxiety.[/quote:292rjkrd] That's an interesting point, but perhaps the juxtaposition of those types of elements is what appeals to an architect trying to make a statement? I'm certain Art Van DeLay would find a way to make it work, soupcan Apr 03 2009 08:20 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":3rv0nqrw]I kinda like the Minnesota park. The Nationals less so, but it's not bad either.[/quote:3rv0nqrw] Yeah - the Minnesota park has a sort of retro Jetsons feel to it. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 08:29 AM The Nats park has like five different tiers, each one more heavily raked than the one below it. Sometimes the price of everybody being closer to the field horizontally is that you get some crazy options vertically. I'm sure you'll hear Keith complain this season about the vertigo-inducing situation of their press box. That is, if Mr. Fancy Pants makes a road trip to Washington. HahnSolo Apr 03 2009 01:35 PM Hmm. I guess my perception of Nationals Park was different. I took the Metro to the game and walked in through the CF promenade. And we sat field level, so I didn't notice the slopes in the upper reaches. I never saw the glass encasings in the photo above, and liked the interior of the ballpark. metirish Apr 03 2009 06:33 PM ="Nymr83"]In the post this morning Sherman says bad things about the New Yankee stadium while Kevin Kernan has some faint praise for Citi Field (though more dumping on Shea) Sherman just about takes a dump on the doorstep of the new MYF stadium I'm biased of course but I have tuned into YES a few times and if I didn't know better I would think they were playing the the MFYII.... IN TOUGH TIMES, A MONUMENT TO GREED ] IT IS beautiful, of course. But in the way that a woman who went to the world's best plastic surgeon might be beautiful. It is supposed to remind you of the previous incarnation, and ends up feeling artificial and overdone. The new Yankee Stadium has just about everything you would want in a modern sports facility, except charm and a sense of proportion. If you can afford the prices, you should have a good time there. The sightlines are wonderful. The large screen in center field is so clear you really do feel as if you could reach out and touch the people on it. The concourses are wide, and the food choices abundant. Yet the place brought nausea, not nostalgia. It just feels like the wrong time in the history of this country and this city to be opening up the George Mahal. When the project was initiated 2 � years ago, the Yankees could not have known what the state of the economy was going to be now. But this is about more than wrong place, wrong time. The Yankees' sense of entitlement and unrestrained excess is timeless. They will tell you they built this stadium for the everyman, stressing what they consider still affordable pricing and amenities. But this stadium, in actuality, was built for a moneyed class that in many respects does not even exist in this city any longer. Those $2,625-per-game Legends tickets behind home plate are selling slowly, and that certainly is because there is a whole class of banking/Wall Street/real estate mogul who would have scooped them up but has gone the way of flannel uniforms. But also because those seats not long ago would have screamed status, and now speak only to greed. The working world will not look onto those sitting there with envy. They will wish that those seats came with a dunk tank, not waiter service. The Yanks also want to make you believe that the history and romance could be easily shipped from the old place to the new one simply by recreating dimensions, reconstructing the facade or replanting Monument Park. However, the new Stadium didn't make me think of the place just across the street. It made me think about Vegas or Disney World, since it made me think of a fake place designed to manipulate my emotions and get into my wallet. "We don't see it as ostentatious or flashy," Hal Steinbrenner said. "We see it as classy." For me, class is out. In truth, sadly, the Yanks have conjured up a building that defines them: cold, corporate, over-privileged. At a financially distressed time in which Bud Selig has appealed to teams and players to be more fan friendly than ever, the Yanks have constructed even more of a moat between their players and those paying for all the goodies. For example, Yankee executives see it as a positive that the players now have underground parking rather than in the old place, where they had to walk 50 feet outdoors from the parking lot to the Stadium. In those 50 feet, fans held back by barricades could scream to their favorite players and -- if one of those players indulged -- get an autograph or two. Now the interaction between fans and players, and media and players, will be less than ever. I know no one sheds a tear for the media, but I think the new clubhouse, overstocked with off-limits areas and clandestine exits, only leads to a group that will feel less accountability. And an over-privileged nature and lack of accountability have hurt recent editions of the Yankees. "We are not a regular team," Brian Bruney said. "We are the New York Yankees, and it has to be nicer." Nice is in the eye of the beholder, and if you work for one of those few places left where the corporate card is still set on unlimited, then the new Yankee Stadium is for you. For many others, this place will have all the charm of Bernie Madoff. seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 06:44 PM And Brian Bruney, you're an overpaid tub of goo who can't find the strike zone with a guide dog who's lucky the Yankees wouldn't know pitching talent if it punched them in the neck, or you'd find yourself pitching for the Sioux City Sand Gnats. So shut the hell up and join Caveman on the Ass Line. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 08:16 PM Wolfie, save something for the regular season. MFS62 Apr 03 2009 08:56 PM I just went on mlb.com to check the box scores. I noticed that the Mets' game tonight was played at "CitiField". The Yankees' game tonight was played at "New Yankee Stadium". Is that going to be the official name of that place? Later seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 08:57 PM Didn't they call it "New Comiskey" for a while too? themetfairy Apr 03 2009 08:58 PM ="seawolf17":3ge41hzz]Didn't they call it "New Comiskey" for a while too?[/quote:3ge41hzz] Yes - that's what it was called when I visited the park in 1991. seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 09:08 PM ="Edgy DC"]Wolfie, save something for the regular season. I know, but again, this stuff pisses me off. Who the hell is Brian Bruney? Good thing crappy middle relievers don't bat in the American League, or if I'm Lou Piniella tomorrow, I buzz an exhibition fastball right past his manboobs. You are "a regular team," Bruney. You're one of 30 teams that all need each other, or professional baseball doesn't exist. MFS62 Apr 04 2009 06:27 AM ="seawolf17":11yncmqm]Didn't they call it "New Comiskey" for a while too?[/quote:11yncmqm] Who is they? The White Sox? White Sox fans? The fans in Chicago? The papers in Chicago? But this is the official website of major league baseball itself. And that's why I asked if anyone knew if this is the official name of that place. Not just what some may call it. Later Frayed Knot Apr 04 2009 06:44 AM No, I don't believe 'New' is part of the official name. 'Fucking Gargantuan Edifice to Conspicuous Consumption' may be, although I'd have to check on that to be sure. SteveJRogers Apr 04 2009 06:45 AM ="MFS62":2qks5l00]="seawolf17":2qks5l00]Didn't they call it "New Comiskey" for a while too?[/quote:2qks5l00] Who is they? The White Sox? White Sox fans? The fans in Chicago? The papers in Chicago? But this is the official website of major league baseball itself. And that's why I asked if anyone knew if this is the official name of that place. Not just what some may call it. Later[/quote:2qks5l00] Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes. Reinsdorf didn't sell the naming rights until 2003. So it was Comiskey II from 1991 through 2003. G-Fafif Apr 04 2009 06:55 AM I believe that someday Seawolf will punch that arrogant Brian Brueny at New Yankee Stadium on his fat nose. MFS62 Apr 09 2009 06:56 PM Here's one you might not have heard about. (Thank you, Onion) http://www.theonion.com/content/video/yankees_buil ding_new_vacation Later Kong76 Apr 09 2009 08:39 PM Dude, your link actually pointed to this: http://www.theonion.com/content/video/study_children_exposed_to Figure out how to work stuff, child porn humor ain't for here. Later metsguyinmichigan Apr 09 2009 10:01 PM I clicked the link and thought, "Damn, the bleeping Yankees really ARE trying to appeal to everyone. Now I know why they have that massive video board in center." MFS62 Apr 10 2009 07:36 AM Let's try that again. And let the ad finish. http://www.theonion.com/content/video/yankees_building_new_vacation EDIT: I tried it after I re-posted and it worked. Later

All-Star Game? Starting an All-Star Game, maybe?

A 76.3% increase?!?! Eff you, Yankees. You too, Johnny Damon. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4036916

"I'll wear 48!! Can I manage the team now?"

="metirish":uoy3pvzx]I'm not an architect , hell I'm not even a doctor but I don't know why these new stadiums have any such seating like above.[/quote:uoy3pvzx] I have to say I agree. They made a big fucking deal about having less seats, and angling them toward home plate, and so on... and you have this obstructed-view bullshit? Eff that. seawolf17 Apr 02 2009 08:02 PM A 76.3% increase?!?! Eff you, Yankees. You too, Johnny Damon. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4036916 metirish Apr 02 2009 08:08 PM Wankers - $41.40 to $72.97 - suckers Rockin' Doc Apr 02 2009 08:08 PM Damon should stick to doing Gieco commercials. seawolf17 Apr 02 2009 08:48 PM ="Rockin' Doc":lhs13t5x]Damon should stick to doing Gieco commercials.[/quote:lhs13t5x] Seriously. That pissed me off. "I mean, really, fuck the little guy. I make $13 million a year, guaranteed. So I don't care if they can't afford tickets; I wipe my ass with $1,000 bills." Rockin' Doc Apr 03 2009 04:52 AM A 76.3% increase in the cost of the average ticket for a seat at Yankee Stadium is once again, proof positive that it sucks to be a Yankees fan. Johnny Damon, it seems safe to conclude, is not exactly a thinking man. His comments are insensitive and out of touch with the day to day struggles of the common working man or woman. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 05:51 AM ="Johnny Damon":1g3apd5t]"It's tough. New York can withstand it," he said. "Coming to this plush building, I think it's definitely something that people want to see. I mean, those are great seats. It's going to be tough for a family to afford but, you know, but we'll let the people upstairs worry about that."[/quote:1g3apd5t] Clearly, the people upstairs don't give a damn either. Nymr83 Apr 03 2009 06:18 AM In the post this morning Sherman says bad things about the New Yankee stadium while Kevin Kernan has some faint praise for Citi Field (though more dumping on Shea) soupcan Apr 03 2009 07:00 AM Times has its architectural reviews of both stadia today... ] April 3, 2009 Architecture Review Two New Baseball Palaces, One Stoic, One Scrappy By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF American stadium design has been stuck in a nostalgic funk, with sports franchises recycling the same old images year after year. Still, if you have to go with a retro look, New York City could have done worse than the new Yankee Stadium and Citi Field. Both were designed by Populous (formerly known as HOK Sport Venue Event) and are major upgrades over the stadiums they replaced, which had been looking more and more dilapidated over the years. Both should be fine places to spend a few hours watching a game. What�s more, each stadium subtly reflects the character of the franchises that built them. Yankee Stadium is the kind of stoic, self-conscious monument to history that befits the most successful franchise in American sports. The new home of the Mets, meanwhile, is scrappier and more lighthearted. It plays with history fast and loose, as if it were just another form of entertainment. Yankee management started talking about replacing the old stadium more than a decade ago, and this seemed to be the tougher challenge: the stadium sparkled with the memories of 26 World Series championships. Architecturally, however, the stadium was charmless. Renovation in the 1970s may have made it more comfortable (fans loathed the painful wooden seats of the original version), but it also destroyed many architectural features. The original copper frieze that lined the stadium�s upper deck was ripped out. (A partial concrete replica was added later.) The monuments that had once stood in the deepest recesses of center field were moved to an insipid space behind the left-center field fence and named Monument Park. The little personality the stadium had came from its site: a tight urban lot framed by elevated subway tracks on one side and a city park on the other. The new stadium, which stands across the street from the old one, spruces up that image while reviving some of the lost history. The towering arched windows that dominated the original exterior, an echo of the Roman Colosseum, have been recast in a mix of limestone, granite and cast stone, and they are as imposing as ever. A small urban plaza, raised just above the level of the sidewalk, faces the bars and souvenir shops along River Avenue and the entry to the elevated train, strengthening the structure�s relationship to its urban setting. The city has also promised to build a park and several ball fields just to the south of the stadium in an effort to put a more community-friendly face on the project. A broad pedestrian walkway will eventually link the stadium to the fields and a Metro-North station farther to the south. The biggest improvements, however, are the interiors, which have been organized with an eye to the fans. The concourses are broad open spaces, with concession stands set along the perimeter so that they don�t obstruct views down to the field. More seats are concentrated below the mezzanine level, closer to the action. Even the luxury suites, which suddenly look like a holdover from the era of corporate excess, are discreetly set back so that they don�t detract from the shared intimacy of watching the game. There�s history here, too, or at least a facsimile of it. The Yankees have brought back the old manually operated scoreboards in left and right field, a feature that was last used in the 1960s. A replica of the old frieze sits along the top of the upper deck. Best of all, the slot that separated the scoreboard from the right-field stands in the old stadium has been recreated, so you can still catch glimpses of the subway rumbling by � a reminder that the stadium has been carved out of the heart of a living, thriving city. All in all, the new Yankee Stadium may be an austere, even intimidating place, but there�s nothing tacky about it. It�s straightforward, paint-by-numbers architecture. Getting to Citi Field is a more drawn-out aesthetic experience. Descending from the elevated 7 train in Queens, you have to cross a wide landscaped plaza before arriving at the main entry gate. A sea of parking stretches out in both directions. A pile of rubble (once the old Shea Stadium) currently lies just beyond the parking to the left. The building fits comfortably in this setting. Yankee Stadium�s facade is dominated by vertical lines, which emphasize its monumentality. Citi Field�s facade, which is loosely modeled on Ebbets Field, the former home of the Brooklyn Dodgers, is more low-key. Its brick cladding gives it a warmth that Yankee Stadium doesn�t have. A pre-cast concrete band cuts across the arched exterior, breaking down the structure�s scale and emphasizing its horizontality. History also feels less heavy here. Like the Yankees, the Mets built broad concourses that open up to the field so that you feel close to the game even while you�re standing in line for a beer. But the design is far more eclectic. A porch that cantilevers out over right field is modeled on the old Tiger Stadium. Big steel trusses conjure the structure that supports the nearby elevated train. A soot-colored pedestrian bridge that spans the bullpen behind center field is a miniature version of the Hell Gate Bridge. Even the color of the seats � dark green � was copied from somewhere else: the Polo Grounds, where the New York Giants baseball team played and the Mets played their first two seasons. The casual mood is reinforced by a number of spaces that have little to do with watching a baseball game: an auditorium, a Wiffle ball field � even an event room for weddings or parties. What saves the design from becoming completely hokey, however, is its openness to the real world outside. Most of Queens, from the faded remnants of the 1964 World�s Fair to the Whitestone Expressway and the muddy waters of Flushing Bay, is visible from the main concourse level. Farther up, you can see the Manhattan skyline several miles away. The visitors� bullpen has a view of dilapidated garages and auto body shops across 126th Street to the northeast. The reality of this working-class landscape tempers the artificiality of the interior. Even so, most serious architects today strive to create buildings that reflect the values of their own era, not a nostalgic vision of the past, no matter how open they may be toward their surroundings. And in that regard both stadiums will be a disappointment to students of architecture. For us, the buildings are just another reminder of the enormous gap that remains between high design and popular taste. dinosaur jesus Apr 03 2009 07:12 AM ]Even so, most serious architects today strive to create buildings that reflect the values of their own era, not a nostalgic vision of the past, no matter how open they may be toward their surroundings. The whole game of baseball is a nostalgic vision of the past. What values of our own era do we really want to bring to it? Frayed Knot Apr 03 2009 07:20 AM I like the part where Hankenbrenner (or was it Hal-enbrenner?) says; 'yeah, we overpriced some of the seats and as a result they're not selling as well as we hoped ... but we didn't misread the market!' Umm, yeah ya did. In fact, that's kind of the definition of misreading the market. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 07:20 AM ="dinosaur jesus"]]Even so, most serious architects today strive to create buildings that reflect the values of their own era, not a nostalgic vision of the past, no matter how open they may be toward their surroundings. The whole game of baseball is a nostalgic vision of the past. What values of our own era do we really want to bring to it? I don't know enough about architecture to explain why I agree with that statement, but I do. I would rather the Mets had built a stadium the reflects early 21st Century architecture, whatever it is. Citi Field looks like a nice place to watch a game, and it's visually appealing, but it also has a Disney feel to it, like you're in "Baseball Land." soupcan Apr 03 2009 07:35 AM These two come to mind when I think about new stadiums with a modern bent. Target Field, which is the new stadium now being built for the twins in Minnesota. Nationals - Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 08:00 AM Glass façades and baseball go together like bleach and baby baths. Even if there's no real threat of the two actually coming together --- and even if the vulnerable element is reinforced against the dangerous element --- it creates an atmophere of anxiety. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 08:19 AM I kinda like the Minnesota park. The Nationals less so, but it's not bad either. soupcan Apr 03 2009 08:19 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 08:21 AM ="Edgy DC":292rjkrd]Glass fa�ades and baseball go together like bleach and baby baths. Even if there's no real threat of the two actually coming together --- and even if the vulnerable element is reinforced against the dangerous element --- it creates an atmophere of anxiety.[/quote:292rjkrd] That's an interesting point, but perhaps the juxtaposition of those types of elements is what appeals to an architect trying to make a statement? I'm certain Art Van DeLay would find a way to make it work, soupcan Apr 03 2009 08:20 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":3rv0nqrw]I kinda like the Minnesota park. The Nationals less so, but it's not bad either.[/quote:3rv0nqrw] Yeah - the Minnesota park has a sort of retro Jetsons feel to it. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 08:29 AM The Nats park has like five different tiers, each one more heavily raked than the one below it. Sometimes the price of everybody being closer to the field horizontally is that you get some crazy options vertically. I'm sure you'll hear Keith complain this season about the vertigo-inducing situation of their press box. That is, if Mr. Fancy Pants makes a road trip to Washington. HahnSolo Apr 03 2009 01:35 PM Hmm. I guess my perception of Nationals Park was different. I took the Metro to the game and walked in through the CF promenade. And we sat field level, so I didn't notice the slopes in the upper reaches. I never saw the glass encasings in the photo above, and liked the interior of the ballpark. metirish Apr 03 2009 06:33 PM ="Nymr83"]In the post this morning Sherman says bad things about the New Yankee stadium while Kevin Kernan has some faint praise for Citi Field (though more dumping on Shea) Sherman just about takes a dump on the doorstep of the new MYF stadium I'm biased of course but I have tuned into YES a few times and if I didn't know better I would think they were playing the the MFYII.... IN TOUGH TIMES, A MONUMENT TO GREED ] IT IS beautiful, of course. But in the way that a woman who went to the world's best plastic surgeon might be beautiful. It is supposed to remind you of the previous incarnation, and ends up feeling artificial and overdone. The new Yankee Stadium has just about everything you would want in a modern sports facility, except charm and a sense of proportion. If you can afford the prices, you should have a good time there. The sightlines are wonderful. The large screen in center field is so clear you really do feel as if you could reach out and touch the people on it. The concourses are wide, and the food choices abundant. Yet the place brought nausea, not nostalgia. It just feels like the wrong time in the history of this country and this city to be opening up the George Mahal. When the project was initiated 2 � years ago, the Yankees could not have known what the state of the economy was going to be now. But this is about more than wrong place, wrong time. The Yankees' sense of entitlement and unrestrained excess is timeless. They will tell you they built this stadium for the everyman, stressing what they consider still affordable pricing and amenities. But this stadium, in actuality, was built for a moneyed class that in many respects does not even exist in this city any longer. Those $2,625-per-game Legends tickets behind home plate are selling slowly, and that certainly is because there is a whole class of banking/Wall Street/real estate mogul who would have scooped them up but has gone the way of flannel uniforms. But also because those seats not long ago would have screamed status, and now speak only to greed. The working world will not look onto those sitting there with envy. They will wish that those seats came with a dunk tank, not waiter service. The Yanks also want to make you believe that the history and romance could be easily shipped from the old place to the new one simply by recreating dimensions, reconstructing the facade or replanting Monument Park. However, the new Stadium didn't make me think of the place just across the street. It made me think about Vegas or Disney World, since it made me think of a fake place designed to manipulate my emotions and get into my wallet. "We don't see it as ostentatious or flashy," Hal Steinbrenner said. "We see it as classy." For me, class is out. In truth, sadly, the Yanks have conjured up a building that defines them: cold, corporate, over-privileged. At a financially distressed time in which Bud Selig has appealed to teams and players to be more fan friendly than ever, the Yanks have constructed even more of a moat between their players and those paying for all the goodies. For example, Yankee executives see it as a positive that the players now have underground parking rather than in the old place, where they had to walk 50 feet outdoors from the parking lot to the Stadium. In those 50 feet, fans held back by barricades could scream to their favorite players and -- if one of those players indulged -- get an autograph or two. Now the interaction between fans and players, and media and players, will be less than ever. I know no one sheds a tear for the media, but I think the new clubhouse, overstocked with off-limits areas and clandestine exits, only leads to a group that will feel less accountability. And an over-privileged nature and lack of accountability have hurt recent editions of the Yankees. "We are not a regular team," Brian Bruney said. "We are the New York Yankees, and it has to be nicer." Nice is in the eye of the beholder, and if you work for one of those few places left where the corporate card is still set on unlimited, then the new Yankee Stadium is for you. For many others, this place will have all the charm of Bernie Madoff. seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 06:44 PM And Brian Bruney, you're an overpaid tub of goo who can't find the strike zone with a guide dog who's lucky the Yankees wouldn't know pitching talent if it punched them in the neck, or you'd find yourself pitching for the Sioux City Sand Gnats. So shut the hell up and join Caveman on the Ass Line. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 08:16 PM Wolfie, save something for the regular season. MFS62 Apr 03 2009 08:56 PM I just went on mlb.com to check the box scores. I noticed that the Mets' game tonight was played at "CitiField". The Yankees' game tonight was played at "New Yankee Stadium". Is that going to be the official name of that place? Later seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 08:57 PM Didn't they call it "New Comiskey" for a while too? themetfairy Apr 03 2009 08:58 PM ="seawolf17":3ge41hzz]Didn't they call it "New Comiskey" for a while too?[/quote:3ge41hzz] Yes - that's what it was called when I visited the park in 1991. seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 09:08 PM ="Edgy DC"]Wolfie, save something for the regular season. I know, but again, this stuff pisses me off. Who the hell is Brian Bruney? Good thing crappy middle relievers don't bat in the American League, or if I'm Lou Piniella tomorrow, I buzz an exhibition fastball right past his manboobs. You are "a regular team," Bruney. You're one of 30 teams that all need each other, or professional baseball doesn't exist. MFS62 Apr 04 2009 06:27 AM ="seawolf17":11yncmqm]Didn't they call it "New Comiskey" for a while too?[/quote:11yncmqm] Who is they? The White Sox? White Sox fans? The fans in Chicago? The papers in Chicago? But this is the official website of major league baseball itself. And that's why I asked if anyone knew if this is the official name of that place. Not just what some may call it. Later Frayed Knot Apr 04 2009 06:44 AM No, I don't believe 'New' is part of the official name. 'Fucking Gargantuan Edifice to Conspicuous Consumption' may be, although I'd have to check on that to be sure. SteveJRogers Apr 04 2009 06:45 AM ="MFS62":2qks5l00]="seawolf17":2qks5l00]Didn't they call it "New Comiskey" for a while too?[/quote:2qks5l00] Who is they? The White Sox? White Sox fans? The fans in Chicago? The papers in Chicago? But this is the official website of major league baseball itself. And that's why I asked if anyone knew if this is the official name of that place. Not just what some may call it. Later[/quote:2qks5l00] Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes. Reinsdorf didn't sell the naming rights until 2003. So it was Comiskey II from 1991 through 2003. G-Fafif Apr 04 2009 06:55 AM I believe that someday Seawolf will punch that arrogant Brian Brueny at New Yankee Stadium on his fat nose. MFS62 Apr 09 2009 06:56 PM Here's one you might not have heard about. (Thank you, Onion) http://www.theonion.com/content/video/yankees_buil ding_new_vacation Later Kong76 Apr 09 2009 08:39 PM Dude, your link actually pointed to this: http://www.theonion.com/content/video/study_children_exposed_to Figure out how to work stuff, child porn humor ain't for here. Later metsguyinmichigan Apr 09 2009 10:01 PM I clicked the link and thought, "Damn, the bleeping Yankees really ARE trying to appeal to everyone. Now I know why they have that massive video board in center." MFS62 Apr 10 2009 07:36 AM Let's try that again. And let the ad finish. http://www.theonion.com/content/video/yankees_building_new_vacation EDIT: I tried it after I re-posted and it worked. Later

I was thinking about this today. Thanks for setting it up. I'll take the Marlins this season.

="Edgy DC":2gczmn5v]Nice predition, Edgy.[/quote:2gczmn5v] But FK nailed it: ="FK":2gczmn5v]He should still be good for Detroit this year (how 'bout the fact that being sent to Detroit is no longer considered "banishment") but I'm not so sure I like him 3 years out.[/quote:2gczmn5v] LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 02 2009 01:33 PM http://www.seattlepi.com/scorecard/mlbnews.asp?articleID=180751 Intriguing. VEEEERY intriguing. (Seems to have been missed a lot-- and vocally, too-- wherever he's left. Delgado was a big fan of his, if memory serves...) metirish Apr 02 2009 01:35 PM A bit insulting that they dumped him to make room for Andru Jones. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 02 2009 03:58 PM Agreed. A Cura-crime. But seriously... we wouldn't rather have Catalanotto than Marlon? (1B/OF/As much a 2B as Marlon; faster, stronger and slightly younger. At minor-league prices, that's not something we'd be interested in?) Oh, but he's not the professional pinch-hitter that Marlon is: (Pinch-hitting, career) MA .275/.340/.413 (OPS .753) FC .289/.375/.423 (OPS .798) OlerudOwned Apr 02 2009 04:17 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]Agreed. A Cura-crime. But seriously... we wouldn't rather have Catalanotto than Marlon? (1B/OF/As much a 2B as Marlon; faster, stronger and slightly younger. At minor-league prices, that's not something we'd be interested in?) Oh, but he's not the professional pinch-hitter that Marlon is: (Pinch-hitting, career) MA .275/.340/.413 (OPS .753) FC .289/.375/.423 (OPS .798) I'm by no means a fan of Marlon, but that seems like a sort of unfair shot at anyone defending him. The general vibe I've been getting is that there's no reason to outright dump the guy without having anyone demonstrably better. Now we can argue that there is. Edgy DC Apr 02 2009 04:45 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 07:25 AM I have no problems with Cattle a Knotto. The kick in the gut that is getting released may be just what he needs to be an inspired bench player this year. He's a Long Islander and a solid walk man. Any defense I have for the Mets giving another look to Anderson is based on comparing him to other options in house, and their contracts allowing them to be parked while he cannot be. If we merely want somebody who did better last year, well, that would be almost everybody, I can't argue. My main concern with Frank C. would be that he hasn't played infield since 2002. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 06:31 AM Back page of the Daily News: ON THE MENU Mets consider bringing Sheff aboard And then, as usual, the article itself explains that it's not likely to happen. Sheffield wants to play full time, the Mets are committed to Murphy, etc. metirish Apr 03 2009 07:24 AM That was a bad job right there by Rubin. Gwreck Apr 03 2009 10:33 AM Rubin doesn't write the headlines. Just typical Daily News idiocy there with the back page nonsense. metirish Apr 03 2009 10:42 AM The article was rubbish too. bmfc1 Apr 03 2009 11:07 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 11:07 AM The NY Post (yeah, I know), says that Sheffield is close to joining the Mets. On one hand, he provides the righty power bat off the bench they lack. OTOH, will he gripe about being a bench guy? (This should have a separate thread.) LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 11:07 AM Lennon, Sherman, ESPN 1050... this is disturbingly close to happening. (Of course, it could also be the same source filtered through different outlets, but, still...) Would this signing make Sheffield... A) 2009's George Foster or 2009's Richie Hebner or C) 2009's Kingman, Take 2/Bobby Bo, Take 2? Why? dinosaur jesus Apr 03 2009 11:16 AM 2009's Duke Snider, a class act from a real New York team showing the young Metsies how it's done? Maybe not. metirish Apr 03 2009 11:16 AM If Minaya wanted to sign a malcontent then he should have tired for Manny Ramirez . Fman99 Apr 03 2009 11:17 AM Newsday is saying it could happen as soon as tonight, as per Rotoworld. Blerch. metirish Apr 03 2009 11:19 AM Probably they will cut Anderson to make room which should cheer up several people here LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 11:20 AM ="dinosaur jesus":2l2zb8au]2009's Duke Snider, a class act from a real New York team showing the young Metsies how it's done? Maybe not.[/quote:2l2zb8au] Best case, in our DH-free league, he's 2009's 2007 Moises. BEST case. Still, I wouldn't mind having him around for interleague. Does the MLBPA still frown on timeshares? Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 11:24 AM I'm recalling the MOFo days, when Sheffield was trying to dickbag his way out of his Dodger contract. The Mets were widely considered the likeliest destination, as they almost always are when an expensive asshole needs a home (see Manny). The forum caught fire with the pro- and anti-Sheffield factions, until one out of every three threads was Sheffield related. After weeks of controversy, someone --- I think the poster then known as Leftfield --- looked at the back end of the forum and discovered the very last thread was about Sheffield, as was the very first. Twenty pages and twenty threads on each page. Wall to wall Sheffield. I'm not sure I can deal with a guy who carts around that sort of bullshit. Frayed Knot Apr 03 2009 11:26 AM Now that we've got the Post, the D-News, Newsday, ESPN radio, and WFAN all reporting it's near a done deal, I guess it's near a done deal. Either that there's one full-o-shit source out there and the others are all copying each other while pretending they dug up the info on their own. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 11:28 AM I'm still skeptical. His personality aside (for a moment) if he's willing to be a pinch-hitter, reserve player, then that's one thing. But if he's looking to take a job away from Daniel Murphy or Ryan Church, that's another. metirish Apr 03 2009 11:30 AM I would think that he pushes Murphy to the bench. Daniel is lovely and all but he is a rookie. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 11:37 AM Fuck that. Sheffield is ugly and ugly. And Murphy's rookie year is behind him. metirish Apr 03 2009 11:39 AM Not saying that's what I want but it seems likely to me. OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 11:41 AM Murphy's a better player at this point, and with his versatility, I'd say Tatis is a better option too. The signing does keep him out of Philly where he would fit much better: platooning with Ibanez or Werth to break up that huge string of lefties, hitting and fielding in a smaller ballpark. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 11:44 AM He hit .225 last year. (He OBP'ed .326 and slugged .400.) 16 doubles and 19 homers in 418 at bats. Walked 58 times, struck out 83 times. Nothing special at all about that. No way would I sit Murphy and stall his progress for a year just to give some aging malcontent a shot at a milestone home run. He can replace Anderson if he wants, but not Murphy. OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 11:46 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 11:53 AM He's played a whopping 48 games in the field over the last 3 seasons. Total career Fielding Runs Above Average in the outfield for his career: -94.2 (On a related note, anybody check out the redesign of Baseball Reference. It's incredible.) Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 11:53 AM Here's what David Lennon is saying in Newsday: ]The Mets have contacted Gary Sheffield directly to gauge his interest in coming to New York and a person familiar with the situation said today that he could sign with a club as soon as tonight. Sheffield worked out yesterday at a college field in Tampa, as first reported by SI.com, and the Mets are considered to be his first choice, with the Phillies and Reds also showing interest. Note that he could sign with a club as soon as tonight. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 11:56 AM And the (richest bitches) are his first choice. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 12:26 PM Having taken a few deep breaths, and looked at the numbers... I've reevaluated. Say what you will about the guy... even when he's relatively crappy, he's still of significant offensive value. His walk rate in the latter phase of his career has remained a plus-plus-- even last year, he was top-15 in the AL, ahead of guys like Brian Roberts, Damon, Abreu and A-Rod. He slugged .443 in two down years. If his bat speed has recovered even slightly since last year, he's an .800 OPS--with such a shayne punim, too!--on the bench. attgig Apr 03 2009 12:34 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 12:34 PM while his walk rate is good, it doesn't help much if he doesn't have any speed. can he really pinch hit? I just don't see it. Catalanotto would've been a better choice imo. we already have tatis, and evens sounds like he'll have a shot sometime during the year. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 12:34 PM Has he ever left a team without burning shit first? Braves? metsmarathon Apr 03 2009 12:38 PM sheffield's equivalent average last year of 0.256 puts him in the company of luis castillo 0.257 and brian schneider 0.254 i'm really hoping the mets aren't foolish enough to actually sign him. and that if they do, that they do not then compound the error by placing him higher in the depth chart than either murphy or church. Fman99 Apr 03 2009 12:41 PM ="metsmarathon":1p6sjfmz]sheffield's equivalent average last year of 0.256 puts him in the company of luis castillo 0.257 and brian schneider 0.254[/quote:1p6sjfmz] Wow. Those numbers cut me deep. I like him as a "kick Marlon to the curb" guy and to spell Church or Murph against a tough lefty, and as a power PH bat off the bench. But no way do I think they should be handing him a starting job of any kind, until "interleague DH" pops up as a choice. metirish Apr 03 2009 12:47 PM #16 is available...Pagan was the last to wear it... LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 12:49 PM ="Edgy DC":3hf23mwu]Has he ever left a team without burning shit first? Braves?[/quote:3hf23mwu] I hope you meant that figuratively, because I don't think signing an arsonist when breaking in a new stadium is a good idea. metsmarathon Apr 03 2009 12:50 PM ="metsmarathon":2k3jrt6p]sheffield's equivalent average last year of 0.256 puts him in the company of luis castillo 0.257 and brian schneider 0.254 i'm really hoping the mets aren't foolish enough to actually sign him. and that if they do, that they do not then compound the error by placing him higher in the depth chart than either murphy or church.[/quote:2k3jrt6p] ok, i'm suffering a case of conflicting reports. on baseball prospectus' pecota cards, they have his 2008 EqA as 0.256. on their DT cards, they have it at 0.267. castillo's pecota card and DT card both show 0.261, and schneider's pecota and DT cards both say 0.256. and now i can't get back to the page that showed me the 0.257 for castillo. so i guess, take my numbers as approximate....? regardless, even at 0.267, that's no great shakes. Frayed Knot Apr 03 2009 01:14 PM Sheff's a Met (acc to WFAN) Can't remember the last time I [u:25ntqmw0]Pre[/u:25ntqmw0]-disliked a Met player. duan Apr 03 2009 01:17 PM jesus wept. 400,000 is all he'll be paid and we've a starting outfield including 2 guys who're lefties and NEITHER of whom are locks to hit 20 home runs and a lefty firstbaseman too? I know you might feel he's a grumpy fucker, but if he can he the can of fire in his belly that Manny had for the dodgers last year then he's got plenty of potential to be a contributor and if he ISN'T we cut him and bring up Bobby Kielty!!!!!! John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 03 2009 01:17 PM If Anderson gets whacked here I can see it. OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 01:20 PM My concern is less that they have him, and more that they'll keep him even if he sucks. Well, that and defense. metirish Apr 03 2009 01:25 PM Yeah his glove isn't great but neither is Murphy's or Church's defense that great. Sheff is a real gansta for Jerry Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 01:27 PM I'll disagree on Church. Compared to most rightfielders, I'm saying he's good. metirish Apr 03 2009 01:28 PM Yes he is good , better than we were led to believe I think.... G-Fafif Apr 03 2009 01:29 PM Ladies and gentlemen, your 1997 World Champion Florida Marlins! LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 01:30 PM Heyman has it, too. He's at his best when motivated (raking in a couple of previous contract years)... and if desperation doesn't motivate, what does? metirish Apr 03 2009 01:31 PM Sheffield always wanted to be a Mets player.......I'm sure of it... MFS62 Apr 03 2009 01:32 PM ="Edgy DC"] The Mets were widely considered the likeliest destination, as they almost always are when an expensive asshole needs a home (see Manny). A brief, but accurate, description. Later attgig Apr 03 2009 01:40 PM first milestone home run hit in citibank: Gary Sheffield - 500. he doesn't play at all while on the road, and only plays at home until 500 gets hit. he gets cut soon after batting .212 through the month of april. that's my prediction for what happens to gary. attgig Apr 03 2009 01:43 PM they still haven't made it official that marlon's the one getting cut, have they? RealityChuck Apr 03 2009 01:47 PM It's chump change to sign him. Doesn't work out? He gets released. It's a smart deal. It may not work out, but for the minimum, it's a cheap gamble for a significant upside. duan Apr 03 2009 01:55 PM ="OlerudOwned":3mofw6v8]My concern is less that they have him, and more that they'll keep him even if he sucks. Well, that and defense.[/quote:3mofw6v8] but right now, he'd be competing with Nick Evans and Marlon Anderson for a roster spot - it isn't hard to see him being quite a lot better then either of them. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 01:57 PM Keeping a guy even though he sucks is more likely when you're on the hook for a big contract. Since the Mets will be paying Sheffield the minimum salary, that shouldn't be a problem. metirish Apr 03 2009 01:58 PM Ken Davidoff ] It will be interesting to see how Sheff would function in this Mets clubhouse. When he was with the Yankees, Sheffield knew that he couldn't cross Derek Jeter. Will Sheffield respect anyone in this clubhouse the same way? Probably not. But again - if he hits, his personality isn't much of an issue. If he doesn't hit, he's out. mind boggling OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 02:00 PM ="metirish"]Ken Davidoff ] It will be interesting to see how Sheff would function in this Mets clubhouse. When he was with the Yankees, Sheffield knew that he couldn't cross Derek Jeter. Will Sheffield respect anyone in this clubhouse the same way? Probably not. But again - if he hits, his personality isn't much of an issue. If he doesn't hit, he's out. mind boggling It has to all be a joke, right? Like, a game of one-upsmanship to see who drop the most ridiculous Jeter deification into a piece of professional journalism? Please? Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 02:05 PM I resolve to send a box of candy and a basket of fresh fruit to any sportswriter who leaves Jeter unchecked on his Hall-of-Fame ballot. metirish Apr 03 2009 02:05 PM Would even Sheffield cross these two ?...I think not Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 02:06 PM That photo is even more gay than the one of Alex Rodriguez snogging his reflection in the mirror. metirish Apr 03 2009 02:11 PM ="Benjamin Grimm"]That photo is even more gay than the one of Alex Rodriguez snogging his reflection in the mirror. OK , this one is more fierce LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 02:34 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":7llf1e9x]That photo is even more gay than the one of Alex Rodriguez snogging his reflection in the mirror.[/quote:7llf1e9x] More gay, si. More disturbing? Not in the least. And if Sheff doesn't play... is it because Jerry's racist? Nymr83 Apr 03 2009 02:42 PM i think this will end up being a distraction. my prediction: he won't hit enough to deserve to take significant ABs away from church or murphy in the outfield, he'll play a little more than he deserves too because of who he is, he'll still whine and cry about playign time, he'll be gone by July 1st. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 02:46 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 06:26 PM ="Tom Singer / MLB.com"]The possibility of playing his home games within miles of Yankee Stadium might also appeal to Sheffield. What? "Well, the Giants were offering me a second year at $4 million guaranteed, but Mets were giving me a chance to be moderately near Yankee Stadium. I couldn't pass that up." Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 02:48 PM I swear, sportswriting has reached a level of insanity I never would have imagined. Here's a fun fact about Gary Sheffield: He was the Comeback Player of the Year... in 1992! Seventeen years ago! Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 03:03 PM ="Nymr83":282zbt07]i think this will end up being a distraction. my prediction: he won't hit enough to deserve to take significant ABs away from church or murphy in the outfield, he'll play a little more than he deserves too because of who he is, he'll still whine and cry about playign time, he'll be gone by July 1st.[/quote:282zbt07] You know, a lot of Rogers and Hammerstein musicals are about a group of disparate people learning to live together --- farmers and ranchers, US servicemembers and South Seas islanders, townees and carnies --- and to thrive once they get past differences and find their united purpose. But you know --- before they could unify and prosper, they would have to take out the bad seed, face up to ol' Jud and give him his. Somebody not with the program had to be whacked. Maybe Shef will end up being the new George Foster. Frayed Knot Apr 03 2009 03:09 PM He still could be enough of a RH threat w/good OBP to put a scare into opposing pitchers & managers - which is kind of what we need in a way. The problems are: - questionable (at best) defensive skills to the point where he may be marginally useable anywhere but in the batter's box -- something that's particularly true in an OF he's never seen with what looks like might be a tricky wall in spots - he reportedly only wanted to sign with a team that was going to give him significant ABs. Did they promise him that? -- If so that's something that can only come at the expense of either Murphy or Church - he's not only an ass, but he's one who will trash mgmt, teammates, the press, MLB as a whole, and probably Barack Obama if he's not getting what he wants -- and he often finds something to get pissed at (see points 1 & 2). Hopefully he got read the riot act before a deal was signed. Not that they couldn't drop him anyway but at least this way he knows that going in. metsguyinmichigan Apr 03 2009 03:10 PM So our first 500 homer celebration will be like our first 300 win celebration. A guy we don't like, but we'll take it! OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 03:41 PM ="Edgy DC"]="By Tom Singer / MLB.com"]The possibility of playing his home games within miles of Yankee Stadium might also appeal to Sheffield. What? "Well, the Giants were offering me a second year at $4 million guaranteed, but Mets were giving me a chance to be moderately near Yankee Stadium. I couldn't pass that up." I can only conclude that Sheffield is homeless, and looks forward to taking shelter in the now-abandoned facilities of the old Yankee Stadium. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 03:44 PM ]he's not only an ass, but he's one who will trash mgmt, teammates, the press, MLB as a whole, and probably Barack Obama if he's not getting what he wants -- and he often finds something to get pissed at (see points 1 & 2). Hopefully he got read the riot act before a deal was signed. Not that they couldn't drop him anyway but at least this way he knows that going in. He always seems to say this stuff on the way out the door. Maybe he's not so much a bad guy... as a bad breaker-upper? "Hey, Evans-- you have a big head! Big head!" Kong76 Apr 03 2009 03:55 PM FK: Can't remember the last time I Pre-disliked a Met player <<< I have to say this made me laugh out loud when I was lurking at work. Nymr83 Apr 03 2009 04:55 PM ="Kong76"]FK: Can't remember the last time I Pre-disliked a Met player <<< I have to say this made me laugh out loud when I was lurking at work. Tom Glavine Kong76 Apr 03 2009 05:00 PM Yeah, but two completely different types of dislike. Farmer Ted Apr 03 2009 05:13 PM Fun fact...Sheff and Derek Bell were little league teammates. I hope most similarities end there. batmagadanleadoff Apr 03 2009 05:24 PM ="duan":3d2r4ikm]="OlerudOwned":3d2r4ikm]My concern is less that they have him, and more that they'll keep him even if he sucks. Well, that and defense.[/quote:3d2r4ikm] but right now, he'd be competing with Nick Evans and Marlon Anderson for a roster spot - it isn't hard to see him being quite a lot better then either of them.[/quote:3d2r4ikm] Yes. But will Sheffield go along with getting the amount of playing time -- and no more -- that would have otherwise gone to either Evans or Anderson? It seems that Sheffield would not have agreed to play for the Mets under those conditions. seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 06:47 PM ="Edgy DC"]="Tom Singer / MLB.com"]The possibility of playing his home games within miles of Yankee Stadium might also appeal to Sheffield. What? "Well, the Giants were offering me a second year at $4 million guaranteed, but Mets were giving me a chance to be moderately near Yankee Stadium. I couldn't pass that up." WAIT. Did an actual paid sportswriter actually write that? Holy fuck. I am so sick of this Yankee-loving bullshit. You have got to be kidding me. Hey, Red Sox and Rays, put that on your fucking bulletin boards, in case you need any more reason to knock those fuckers back into third place where they belong. seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 06:49 PM Oh, and you know what? I'm down with Sheffield. Bring it on, Gary! Welcome to the Mets! Make us proud! Kong76 Apr 03 2009 07:00 PM I'll feel better after a coupla three run ding dongs. Frayed Knot Apr 04 2009 05:55 AM ="Kong76":daiwlvuq]Yeah, but two completely different types of dislike.[/quote:daiwlvuq] Egg-Zactly! Actually, I never really disliked Glavine anyway but even so, there's 'pre-dislike' simply because a guy's an accomplished opponent and there's dislike because he comes across as a fuckin' asshole. Chipper, for instance, would be type A and I'd have no problem rooting for him in orange & blue. With Sheff on the other hand - while I'm not going to root for him to fail (an increasingly popular activity for some Met fans it seems) - it's going to be tough to get the warm and fuzzies going.

1. First hit - Johan Santana 2. First double - Johan Santana 3. First triple - Fernando Tatis 4. First home run - Ryan Church 5. First stolen base - Luis Castillo 6. First baserunner caught stealing/picked off - Ryan Church 7. First guy to hit into a double-play - David Wright 8. First batter to strike out - Jose Reyes 9. First fielder to commit an error - Jose Reyes 10. First guy to score a run - Luis Castillo 11. First guy to drive in a run - Johan Santana (following Castillo's walk with an RBI double) 12. First Met player to field a batted ball in fair territory - David Wright 13. First Met to draw a walk - Luis Castillo 14. First Met relief pitcher to make an appearance - Sean Green 15. First Met to reach base on an error - Luis Castillo 16. First winning Met pitcher - Johan Santana 17. First Met pitcher to be relieved in the middle of an inning - Sean Green 18. First Met to to plunk an opposing batter - John Maine 19. First Met to be hit by a pitch - Carlos Delgado 20. First Met pinch-hitter - Marlon Fucking Anderson

True. But now I'm actually mad at the Mets for not doing this promotion.

Shit, this would be amazing. Replace Davey in 1988 with Kevin McReynolds, Bonilla in 1992 with Sid Fernandez, and Izzy in 1995 with Bobby Jones and this would be the most awesome thing in the history of things. You're my hero, Greg.

Gary, cut it out. Seriously. Just stop. Nobody likes a whiner.

I don't mean this in a bad way, but if a trivia question takes sixteen hints and ninety posts without anyone sniffing an answer, I think it's a bit of trivia that would get you fired from the "Jeopardy" clue crew.

I'd take a shot on Willis too, but wow, he's been dreadful. Something's not right... PEDs or an injury or something in his head.

="86-Dreamer":1528ztxl]When Wally Matthews writes a column tomorrow proclaiming that the Mets HAVE to do this, then I will be even more confident in my position.[/quote:1528ztxl] This. Edgy DC Mar 31 2009 08:41 AM I'm not particularly against Sheffield. His falling out with Bonds was classic stuff, and he's got Mets blood in his veins. But I'm not particularly confident that he'd be an improvement on the hackings of Bobby Kielty, and I see Kielty more willing to wait for an opportunity in Buffalo than Sheffield. John Cougar Lunchbucket Mar 31 2009 08:43 AM Sheff's the kind of guy who will wind up with Washington. metirish Mar 31 2009 08:46 AM ="seawolf17":2ohvvtsc]="86-Dreamer":2ohvvtsc]When Wally Matthews writes a column tomorrow proclaiming that the Mets HAVE to do this, then I will be even more confident in my position.[/quote:2ohvvtsc] This.[/quote:2ohvvtsc] Good posting.... Do guys guaranteed $14 million get cut for having a bad ST , obviously they do but is there more to this? duan Mar 31 2009 08:47 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3bjqmc0t]Sheff's the kind of guy who will wind up with Washington.[/quote:3bjqmc0t] and will tatoo Oliver Perez with alarming regularity. John Cougar Lunchbucket Mar 31 2009 08:47 AM Gotta tip ypour hat to the Tigers. They know how to eat money. They released Easley when he had a bundle coming to him and are considering the same with Willis I understand. TransMonk Mar 31 2009 08:49 AM Willis would be worth a bigger look than Sheff IMO. metirish Mar 31 2009 08:52 AM ="TransMonk":5i0sjryr]Willis would be worth a bigger look than Sheff IMO.[/quote:5i0sjryr] I would really like to see Willis get a shot with the Mets if he is cut. I always thought he would end up with the Mets , or hoped maybe. Edgy DC Mar 31 2009 08:52 AM Because the 18 outfielders the sorry Nationals currently have just isn't enough. Maybe back to Florida, taking the lefties off of Jeremy Hermida. There's always Texas. Always. But my guess is going to be Seattle, where he can share DHing with Junior Griffey. Their starting leftfielder, if you believe their depth chart, is Endy Chavez, so they don't look particularly set. duan Mar 31 2009 08:59 AM ="metirish":fr5lf557]="TransMonk":fr5lf557]Willis would be worth a bigger look than Sheff IMO.[/quote:fr5lf557] I would really like to see Willis get a shot with the Mets if he is cut. I always thought he would end up with the Mets , or hoped maybe.[/quote:fr5lf557] not least because it's crazy to not have him hitting. Dontrelle's a dude and I'd love to get him back on track. smg58 Mar 31 2009 09:41 AM If the Tigers can cut Sheffield then we can cut Marlon, right? I'd have no problem giving Willis a no-risk look. It would be ironic, given all those trade rumors a few years ago. I wouldn't get my hopes up for too much, though; he's basically a lottery ticket at this point. seawolf17 Mar 31 2009 09:44 AM I'd take a shot on Willis too, but wow, he's been dreadful. Something's not right... PEDs or an injury or something in his head. Edgy DC Mar 31 2009 09:49 AM ="smg58":2utwdplb]If the Tigers can cut Sheffield then we can cut Marlon, right?[/quote:2utwdplb] Of course they can. And they will when there is a more compelling reason to than fan outrage over last season. duan Mar 31 2009 10:16 AM ="smg58":389e0x5a]If the Tigers can cut Sheffield then we can cut Marlon, right? I'd have no problem giving Willis a no-risk look. It would be ironic, given all those trade rumors a few years ago. I wouldn't get my hopes up for too much, though; he's basically a lottery ticket at this point.[/quote:389e0x5a] Of course, but if you could stash him at Buffalo and come up with a coherent plan you'd love to have bought him at the right time. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Mar 31 2009 11:05 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 31 2009 11:07 AM ="Edgy DC":1j4faii2]="smg58":1j4faii2]If the Tigers can cut Sheffield then we can cut Marlon, right?[/quote:1j4faii2] Of course they can. And they will when there is a more compelling reason to than fan outrage over last season.[/quote:1j4faii2] How about: A) Below-replacement-level defensive prowess Little to no positional flexibility C) Slightly below average speed D) Career OPS for the PH specialist: .705 This is a recording. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Mar 31 2009 11:06 AM ="duan":119j9z0h]="John Cougar Lunchbucket":119j9z0h]Sheff's the kind of guy who will wind up with Washington.[/quote:119j9z0h] and will tatoo Oliver Perez with alarming regularity.[/quote:119j9z0h] I had the same thought, exactly. Spooky. Edgy DC Mar 31 2009 11:18 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":31ocln8d]A) Below-replacement-level defensive prowess[/quote:31ocln8d] As measured how? ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":31ocln8d] Little to no positional flexibility[/quote:31ocln8d] Demonstrably untrue. ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":31ocln8d]C) Slightly below average speed[/quote:31ocln8d] Who is average? Is baserunning really part of the case against this guy? ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":31ocln8d]D) Career OPS for the PH specialist: .705[/quote:31ocln8d] And he's .275 / .340 / .413 // .753 as a pinch-hitter. And can we talk in terms of whom we are giving the spot to instead? Because until we do, it's simply vindictiveness. ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":31ocln8d]This is a recording.[/quote:31ocln8d] Really? How many times have you made that post? The guy was awful for the Mets last season, but as bad as he was, he was just as excellent in 2007. I suspect he'll be closer to 2008 myself, but I don't see the poison pill in giving the season four weeks to find out. smg58 Mar 31 2009 12:39 PM Marlon had a sub .600 OPS last year, and he has a sub .600 OPS in spring training. The Mets have already committed to two lefthanded hitters on the bench; if Anderson is a third, then when Tatis starts the only righty bat on the bench will be the backup catcher. He was needed to play second base just once last year (four innings), and presumably Murphy could give us that in an emergency. Bobby Kielty and Nick Evans are better hitters who would give our bench better balance. Edgy DC Mar 31 2009 12:47 PM Bobby Kielty and Nick Evans are better hitters, I agree. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Mar 31 2009 01:15 PM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Mar 31 2009 02:16 PM ="Edgy DC"]="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]A) Below-replacement-level defensive prowess As measured how? Um... virtually every (admittedly imperfect) defensive stat out there (career UZRs in the -6 range for every OF position-- and that's with little time at each position; crap range factors throughout his career). The one spot where he's been decent at points-- 2B-- is a spot where he hasn't logged significant time in 3 years... and hasn't had one of those decent points in 5. ]="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"] Little to no positional flexibility Demonstrably untrue. Fair enough-- this I blew. What I was edging toward was the point that he doesn't fill any team needs, position-wise. Every position at which he can fill a lineup spot is one at which we've already got 2-3 abler bodies (Cora, Reed) or bats (Tatis, Evans/Kielty, potentially). ]="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]C) Slightly below average speed Who is average? Is baserunning really part of the case against this guy? Insofar as it's another skill which would give him value as a bench player, yep. (A little unfair? Maybe... but two of our other bench candidates offer this as a weapon.) ]="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]D) Career OPS for the PH specialist: .705 And he's .275 / .340 / .413 // .753 as a pinch-hitter. And can we talk in terms of whom we are giving the spot to instead? Because until we do, it's simply vindictiveness. Kielty or Evans for two, established and burgeoning (respectively) lefty-killers. I see your point about waiting-- Anderson's spot on the team isn't angrying up my stomach lining like other things about the squad. But, ideally, I like a bench constructed out of players who are either well-rounded-- doing 3-4 things well, or serviceably (SuperJoes, if you will)-- or well-imbalanced, doing 1-2 things of value, but doing them exceptionally well (Rustys/Endys). To my mind, if he's going to serve as our "professional hitter" off the bench, and offer little else of on-field value, then he better be pretty damn impactful-- or potentially so-- in that one aspect. One magical half-season aside, he isn't. Edgy DC Mar 31 2009 01:27 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":j3sfxl32]To my mind, if he's going to serve as our "professional hitter" off the bench, and offer little else of on-field value, then he better be pretty damn impactful-- or potentially so-- in that one aspect. One magical half-season aside, he isn't.[/quote:j3sfxl32] If he doesn't serve, he will be replaced, as Franco was. I think we're all certain. Edgy DC Mar 31 2009 01:49 PM Manuel meets media today with speculation that he's going to announce his 25-man roster early. MFS62 Mar 31 2009 04:23 PM Sheffield in the Mets' clubhouse? I'd rather have Michael Vick watch my dog while I'm on vacation. Later Rockin' Doc Mar 31 2009 08:39 PM Remember that John Rocker is available to pet sit for those of you with cats. Benjamin Grimm Apr 01 2009 04:52 AM Sheffield currently has 499 home runs. It would probably stick in his craw (wherever THAT is) if he didn't get a shot at one more. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 01 2009 08:33 AM ="Benjamin Grimm"]Sheffield currently has 499 home runs. It would probably stick in his craw (wherever THAT is) if he didn't get a shot at one more. Seems it did stick in that enormous, entirely-not-enhanced-by-steroid-usage craw... and his brainpan, where it impeded his ability to realistically process the world around him: "I wouldn't say I'm shocked, but I am surprised," Sheffield told The Oakland Press of Pontiac. "To do this when somebody is one home run away ... I don't know how to react to it." "Jim [Leyland] said, 'We're going to go with versatility.' When he said that word I thought to myself, 'I'm probably the most athletic guy on this team.' But they're entitled to their opinion," Sheffield said. According to a number of reputable sources, the Phils have been working the phone. Hard. Frayed Knot Apr 01 2009 06:38 PM ="duan"] Tigers released OF/DH Gary Sheffield. The club will eat all of the $14 million they owe him for 2009. Sheffield, 40, hit .225 with 19 home runs and 57 RBI in 114 games last season. He missed time with a shoulder and oblique issue, but was thought to be fully healthy this spring. Sheff is just one homer shy of 500." The problem with Sheff here is that the OF part of that OF/DH designation pretty much left the station about two years ago. Well that plus the fact that he's an asshole. Ranks behind maybe only Clemens in my list of MLB players I really dislike. And how stoopid were the Tigers giving him that deal in the first place? I mean they traded live human beings to the Yanx just to get his 38 year-old self and then tacked on a larger deal then the one he already was under even though there was no No-trade clause incentive to make them do it. I called this one as stupid at the time. Now you can tack this on to the Dontrelle deal (they gave him a contract boost after that trade too) and they're looking at eating a ton of money this year and have a reamed farm system to boot. Edgy DC Apr 01 2009 06:50 PM http://archives.cranepoolforum.net/5000/f1_t5080.shtml Nice predition, Edgy. seawolf17 Apr 01 2009 07:14 PM ="Edgy DC":2gczmn5v]Nice predition, Edgy.[/quote:2gczmn5v] But FK nailed it: ="FK":2gczmn5v]He should still be good for Detroit this year (how 'bout the fact that being sent to Detroit is no longer considered "banishment") but I'm not so sure I like him 3 years out.[/quote:2gczmn5v] LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 02 2009 01:33 PM http://www.seattlepi.com/scorecard/mlbnews.asp?articleID=180751 Intriguing. VEEEERY intriguing. (Seems to have been missed a lot-- and vocally, too-- wherever he's left. Delgado was a big fan of his, if memory serves...) metirish Apr 02 2009 01:35 PM A bit insulting that they dumped him to make room for Andru Jones. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 02 2009 03:58 PM Agreed. A Cura-crime. But seriously... we wouldn't rather have Catalanotto than Marlon? (1B/OF/As much a 2B as Marlon; faster, stronger and slightly younger. At minor-league prices, that's not something we'd be interested in?) Oh, but he's not the professional pinch-hitter that Marlon is: (Pinch-hitting, career) MA .275/.340/.413 (OPS .753) FC .289/.375/.423 (OPS .798) OlerudOwned Apr 02 2009 04:17 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]Agreed. A Cura-crime. But seriously... we wouldn't rather have Catalanotto than Marlon? (1B/OF/As much a 2B as Marlon; faster, stronger and slightly younger. At minor-league prices, that's not something we'd be interested in?) Oh, but he's not the professional pinch-hitter that Marlon is: (Pinch-hitting, career) MA .275/.340/.413 (OPS .753) FC .289/.375/.423 (OPS .798) I'm by no means a fan of Marlon, but that seems like a sort of unfair shot at anyone defending him. The general vibe I've been getting is that there's no reason to outright dump the guy without having anyone demonstrably better. Now we can argue that there is. Edgy DC Apr 02 2009 04:45 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 07:25 AM I have no problems with Cattle a Knotto. The kick in the gut that is getting released may be just what he needs to be an inspired bench player this year. He's a Long Islander and a solid walk man. Any defense I have for the Mets giving another look to Anderson is based on comparing him to other options in house, and their contracts allowing them to be parked while he cannot be. If we merely want somebody who did better last year, well, that would be almost everybody, I can't argue. My main concern with Frank C. would be that he hasn't played infield since 2002. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 06:31 AM Back page of the Daily News: ON THE MENU Mets consider bringing Sheff aboard And then, as usual, the article itself explains that it's not likely to happen. Sheffield wants to play full time, the Mets are committed to Murphy, etc. metirish Apr 03 2009 07:24 AM That was a bad job right there by Rubin. Gwreck Apr 03 2009 10:33 AM Rubin doesn't write the headlines. Just typical Daily News idiocy there with the back page nonsense. metirish Apr 03 2009 10:42 AM The article was rubbish too. bmfc1 Apr 03 2009 11:07 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 11:07 AM The NY Post (yeah, I know), says that Sheffield is close to joining the Mets. On one hand, he provides the righty power bat off the bench they lack. OTOH, will he gripe about being a bench guy? (This should have a separate thread.) LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 11:07 AM Lennon, Sherman, ESPN 1050... this is disturbingly close to happening. (Of course, it could also be the same source filtered through different outlets, but, still...) Would this signing make Sheffield... A) 2009's George Foster or 2009's Richie Hebner or C) 2009's Kingman, Take 2/Bobby Bo, Take 2? Why? dinosaur jesus Apr 03 2009 11:16 AM 2009's Duke Snider, a class act from a real New York team showing the young Metsies how it's done? Maybe not. metirish Apr 03 2009 11:16 AM If Minaya wanted to sign a malcontent then he should have tired for Manny Ramirez . Fman99 Apr 03 2009 11:17 AM Newsday is saying it could happen as soon as tonight, as per Rotoworld. Blerch. metirish Apr 03 2009 11:19 AM Probably they will cut Anderson to make room which should cheer up several people here LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 11:20 AM ="dinosaur jesus":2l2zb8au]2009's Duke Snider, a class act from a real New York team showing the young Metsies how it's done? Maybe not.[/quote:2l2zb8au] Best case, in our DH-free league, he's 2009's 2007 Moises. BEST case. Still, I wouldn't mind having him around for interleague. Does the MLBPA still frown on timeshares? Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 11:24 AM I'm recalling the MOFo days, when Sheffield was trying to dickbag his way out of his Dodger contract. The Mets were widely considered the likeliest destination, as they almost always are when an expensive asshole needs a home (see Manny). The forum caught fire with the pro- and anti-Sheffield factions, until one out of every three threads was Sheffield related. After weeks of controversy, someone --- I think the poster then known as Leftfield --- looked at the back end of the forum and discovered the very last thread was about Sheffield, as was the very first. Twenty pages and twenty threads on each page. Wall to wall Sheffield. I'm not sure I can deal with a guy who carts around that sort of bullshit. Frayed Knot Apr 03 2009 11:26 AM Now that we've got the Post, the D-News, Newsday, ESPN radio, and WFAN all reporting it's near a done deal, I guess it's near a done deal. Either that there's one full-o-shit source out there and the others are all copying each other while pretending they dug up the info on their own. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 11:28 AM I'm still skeptical. His personality aside (for a moment) if he's willing to be a pinch-hitter, reserve player, then that's one thing. But if he's looking to take a job away from Daniel Murphy or Ryan Church, that's another. metirish Apr 03 2009 11:30 AM I would think that he pushes Murphy to the bench. Daniel is lovely and all but he is a rookie. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 11:37 AM Fuck that. Sheffield is ugly and ugly. And Murphy's rookie year is behind him. metirish Apr 03 2009 11:39 AM Not saying that's what I want but it seems likely to me. OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 11:41 AM Murphy's a better player at this point, and with his versatility, I'd say Tatis is a better option too. The signing does keep him out of Philly where he would fit much better: platooning with Ibanez or Werth to break up that huge string of lefties, hitting and fielding in a smaller ballpark. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 11:44 AM He hit .225 last year. (He OBP'ed .326 and slugged .400.) 16 doubles and 19 homers in 418 at bats. Walked 58 times, struck out 83 times. Nothing special at all about that. No way would I sit Murphy and stall his progress for a year just to give some aging malcontent a shot at a milestone home run. He can replace Anderson if he wants, but not Murphy. OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 11:46 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 11:53 AM He's played a whopping 48 games in the field over the last 3 seasons. Total career Fielding Runs Above Average in the outfield for his career: -94.2 (On a related note, anybody check out the redesign of Baseball Reference. It's incredible.) Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 11:53 AM Here's what David Lennon is saying in Newsday: ]The Mets have contacted Gary Sheffield directly to gauge his interest in coming to New York and a person familiar with the situation said today that he could sign with a club as soon as tonight. Sheffield worked out yesterday at a college field in Tampa, as first reported by SI.com, and the Mets are considered to be his first choice, with the Phillies and Reds also showing interest. Note that he could sign with a club as soon as tonight. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 11:56 AM And the (richest bitches) are his first choice. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 12:26 PM Having taken a few deep breaths, and looked at the numbers... I've reevaluated. Say what you will about the guy... even when he's relatively crappy, he's still of significant offensive value. His walk rate in the latter phase of his career has remained a plus-plus-- even last year, he was top-15 in the AL, ahead of guys like Brian Roberts, Damon, Abreu and A-Rod. He slugged .443 in two down years. If his bat speed has recovered even slightly since last year, he's an .800 OPS--with such a shayne punim, too!--on the bench. attgig Apr 03 2009 12:34 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 12:34 PM while his walk rate is good, it doesn't help much if he doesn't have any speed. can he really pinch hit? I just don't see it. Catalanotto would've been a better choice imo. we already have tatis, and evens sounds like he'll have a shot sometime during the year. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 12:34 PM Has he ever left a team without burning shit first? Braves? metsmarathon Apr 03 2009 12:38 PM sheffield's equivalent average last year of 0.256 puts him in the company of luis castillo 0.257 and brian schneider 0.254 i'm really hoping the mets aren't foolish enough to actually sign him. and that if they do, that they do not then compound the error by placing him higher in the depth chart than either murphy or church. Fman99 Apr 03 2009 12:41 PM ="metsmarathon":1p6sjfmz]sheffield's equivalent average last year of 0.256 puts him in the company of luis castillo 0.257 and brian schneider 0.254[/quote:1p6sjfmz] Wow. Those numbers cut me deep. I like him as a "kick Marlon to the curb" guy and to spell Church or Murph against a tough lefty, and as a power PH bat off the bench. But no way do I think they should be handing him a starting job of any kind, until "interleague DH" pops up as a choice. metirish Apr 03 2009 12:47 PM #16 is available...Pagan was the last to wear it... LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 12:49 PM ="Edgy DC":3hf23mwu]Has he ever left a team without burning shit first? Braves?[/quote:3hf23mwu] I hope you meant that figuratively, because I don't think signing an arsonist when breaking in a new stadium is a good idea. metsmarathon Apr 03 2009 12:50 PM ="metsmarathon":2k3jrt6p]sheffield's equivalent average last year of 0.256 puts him in the company of luis castillo 0.257 and brian schneider 0.254 i'm really hoping the mets aren't foolish enough to actually sign him. and that if they do, that they do not then compound the error by placing him higher in the depth chart than either murphy or church.[/quote:2k3jrt6p] ok, i'm suffering a case of conflicting reports. on baseball prospectus' pecota cards, they have his 2008 EqA as 0.256. on their DT cards, they have it at 0.267. castillo's pecota card and DT card both show 0.261, and schneider's pecota and DT cards both say 0.256. and now i can't get back to the page that showed me the 0.257 for castillo. so i guess, take my numbers as approximate....? regardless, even at 0.267, that's no great shakes. Frayed Knot Apr 03 2009 01:14 PM Sheff's a Met (acc to WFAN) Can't remember the last time I [u:25ntqmw0]Pre[/u:25ntqmw0]-disliked a Met player. duan Apr 03 2009 01:17 PM jesus wept. 400,000 is all he'll be paid and we've a starting outfield including 2 guys who're lefties and NEITHER of whom are locks to hit 20 home runs and a lefty firstbaseman too? I know you might feel he's a grumpy fucker, but if he can he the can of fire in his belly that Manny had for the dodgers last year then he's got plenty of potential to be a contributor and if he ISN'T we cut him and bring up Bobby Kielty!!!!!! John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 03 2009 01:17 PM If Anderson gets whacked here I can see it. OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 01:20 PM My concern is less that they have him, and more that they'll keep him even if he sucks. Well, that and defense. metirish Apr 03 2009 01:25 PM Yeah his glove isn't great but neither is Murphy's or Church's defense that great. Sheff is a real gansta for Jerry Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 01:27 PM I'll disagree on Church. Compared to most rightfielders, I'm saying he's good. metirish Apr 03 2009 01:28 PM Yes he is good , better than we were led to believe I think.... G-Fafif Apr 03 2009 01:29 PM Ladies and gentlemen, your 1997 World Champion Florida Marlins! LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 01:30 PM Heyman has it, too. He's at his best when motivated (raking in a couple of previous contract years)... and if desperation doesn't motivate, what does? metirish Apr 03 2009 01:31 PM Sheffield always wanted to be a Mets player.......I'm sure of it... MFS62 Apr 03 2009 01:32 PM ="Edgy DC"] The Mets were widely considered the likeliest destination, as they almost always are when an expensive asshole needs a home (see Manny). A brief, but accurate, description. Later attgig Apr 03 2009 01:40 PM first milestone home run hit in citibank: Gary Sheffield - 500. he doesn't play at all while on the road, and only plays at home until 500 gets hit. he gets cut soon after batting .212 through the month of april. that's my prediction for what happens to gary. attgig Apr 03 2009 01:43 PM they still haven't made it official that marlon's the one getting cut, have they? RealityChuck Apr 03 2009 01:47 PM It's chump change to sign him. Doesn't work out? He gets released. It's a smart deal. It may not work out, but for the minimum, it's a cheap gamble for a significant upside. duan Apr 03 2009 01:55 PM ="OlerudOwned":3mofw6v8]My concern is less that they have him, and more that they'll keep him even if he sucks. Well, that and defense.[/quote:3mofw6v8] but right now, he'd be competing with Nick Evans and Marlon Anderson for a roster spot - it isn't hard to see him being quite a lot better then either of them. Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 01:57 PM Keeping a guy even though he sucks is more likely when you're on the hook for a big contract. Since the Mets will be paying Sheffield the minimum salary, that shouldn't be a problem. metirish Apr 03 2009 01:58 PM Ken Davidoff ] It will be interesting to see how Sheff would function in this Mets clubhouse. When he was with the Yankees, Sheffield knew that he couldn't cross Derek Jeter. Will Sheffield respect anyone in this clubhouse the same way? Probably not. But again - if he hits, his personality isn't much of an issue. If he doesn't hit, he's out. mind boggling OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 02:00 PM ="metirish"]Ken Davidoff ] It will be interesting to see how Sheff would function in this Mets clubhouse. When he was with the Yankees, Sheffield knew that he couldn't cross Derek Jeter. Will Sheffield respect anyone in this clubhouse the same way? Probably not. But again - if he hits, his personality isn't much of an issue. If he doesn't hit, he's out. mind boggling It has to all be a joke, right? Like, a game of one-upsmanship to see who drop the most ridiculous Jeter deification into a piece of professional journalism? Please? Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 02:05 PM I resolve to send a box of candy and a basket of fresh fruit to any sportswriter who leaves Jeter unchecked on his Hall-of-Fame ballot. metirish Apr 03 2009 02:05 PM Would even Sheffield cross these two ?...I think not Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 02:06 PM That photo is even more gay than the one of Alex Rodriguez snogging his reflection in the mirror. metirish Apr 03 2009 02:11 PM ="Benjamin Grimm"]That photo is even more gay than the one of Alex Rodriguez snogging his reflection in the mirror. OK , this one is more fierce LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 02:34 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":7llf1e9x]That photo is even more gay than the one of Alex Rodriguez snogging his reflection in the mirror.[/quote:7llf1e9x] More gay, si. More disturbing? Not in the least. And if Sheff doesn't play... is it because Jerry's racist? Nymr83 Apr 03 2009 02:42 PM i think this will end up being a distraction. my prediction: he won't hit enough to deserve to take significant ABs away from church or murphy in the outfield, he'll play a little more than he deserves too because of who he is, he'll still whine and cry about playign time, he'll be gone by July 1st. Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 02:46 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 03 2009 06:26 PM ="Tom Singer / MLB.com"]The possibility of playing his home games within miles of Yankee Stadium might also appeal to Sheffield. What? "Well, the Giants were offering me a second year at $4 million guaranteed, but Mets were giving me a chance to be moderately near Yankee Stadium. I couldn't pass that up." Benjamin Grimm Apr 03 2009 02:48 PM I swear, sportswriting has reached a level of insanity I never would have imagined. Here's a fun fact about Gary Sheffield: He was the Comeback Player of the Year... in 1992! Seventeen years ago! Edgy DC Apr 03 2009 03:03 PM ="Nymr83":282zbt07]i think this will end up being a distraction. my prediction: he won't hit enough to deserve to take significant ABs away from church or murphy in the outfield, he'll play a little more than he deserves too because of who he is, he'll still whine and cry about playign time, he'll be gone by July 1st.[/quote:282zbt07] You know, a lot of Rogers and Hammerstein musicals are about a group of disparate people learning to live together --- farmers and ranchers, US servicemembers and South Seas islanders, townees and carnies --- and to thrive once they get past differences and find their united purpose. But you know --- before they could unify and prosper, they would have to take out the bad seed, face up to ol' Jud and give him his. Somebody not with the program had to be whacked. Maybe Shef will end up being the new George Foster. Frayed Knot Apr 03 2009 03:09 PM He still could be enough of a RH threat w/good OBP to put a scare into opposing pitchers & managers - which is kind of what we need in a way. The problems are: - questionable (at best) defensive skills to the point where he may be marginally useable anywhere but in the batter's box -- something that's particularly true in an OF he's never seen with what looks like might be a tricky wall in spots - he reportedly only wanted to sign with a team that was going to give him significant ABs. Did they promise him that? -- If so that's something that can only come at the expense of either Murphy or Church - he's not only an ass, but he's one who will trash mgmt, teammates, the press, MLB as a whole, and probably Barack Obama if he's not getting what he wants -- and he often finds something to get pissed at (see points 1 & 2). Hopefully he got read the riot act before a deal was signed. Not that they couldn't drop him anyway but at least this way he knows that going in. metsguyinmichigan Apr 03 2009 03:10 PM So our first 500 homer celebration will be like our first 300 win celebration. A guy we don't like, but we'll take it! OlerudOwned Apr 03 2009 03:41 PM ="Edgy DC"]="By Tom Singer / MLB.com"]The possibility of playing his home games within miles of Yankee Stadium might also appeal to Sheffield. What? "Well, the Giants were offering me a second year at $4 million guaranteed, but Mets were giving me a chance to be moderately near Yankee Stadium. I couldn't pass that up." I can only conclude that Sheffield is homeless, and looks forward to taking shelter in the now-abandoned facilities of the old Yankee Stadium. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 03 2009 03:44 PM ]he's not only an ass, but he's one who will trash mgmt, teammates, the press, MLB as a whole, and probably Barack Obama if he's not getting what he wants -- and he often finds something to get pissed at (see points 1 & 2). Hopefully he got read the riot act before a deal was signed. Not that they couldn't drop him anyway but at least this way he knows that going in. He always seems to say this stuff on the way out the door. Maybe he's not so much a bad guy... as a bad breaker-upper? "Hey, Evans-- you have a big head! Big head!" Kong76 Apr 03 2009 03:55 PM FK: Can't remember the last time I Pre-disliked a Met player <<< I have to say this made me laugh out loud when I was lurking at work. Nymr83 Apr 03 2009 04:55 PM ="Kong76"]FK: Can't remember the last time I Pre-disliked a Met player <<< I have to say this made me laugh out loud when I was lurking at work. Tom Glavine Kong76 Apr 03 2009 05:00 PM Yeah, but two completely different types of dislike. Farmer Ted Apr 03 2009 05:13 PM Fun fact...Sheff and Derek Bell were little league teammates. I hope most similarities end there. batmagadanleadoff Apr 03 2009 05:24 PM ="duan":3d2r4ikm]="OlerudOwned":3d2r4ikm]My concern is less that they have him, and more that they'll keep him even if he sucks. Well, that and defense.[/quote:3d2r4ikm] but right now, he'd be competing with Nick Evans and Marlon Anderson for a roster spot - it isn't hard to see him being quite a lot better then either of them.[/quote:3d2r4ikm] Yes. But will Sheffield go along with getting the amount of playing time -- and no more -- that would have otherwise gone to either Evans or Anderson? It seems that Sheffield would not have agreed to play for the Mets under those conditions. seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 06:47 PM ="Edgy DC"]="Tom Singer / MLB.com"]The possibility of playing his home games within miles of Yankee Stadium might also appeal to Sheffield. What? "Well, the Giants were offering me a second year at $4 million guaranteed, but Mets were giving me a chance to be moderately near Yankee Stadium. I couldn't pass that up." WAIT. Did an actual paid sportswriter actually write that? Holy fuck. I am so sick of this Yankee-loving bullshit. You have got to be kidding me. Hey, Red Sox and Rays, put that on your fucking bulletin boards, in case you need any more reason to knock those fuckers back into third place where they belong. seawolf17 Apr 03 2009 06:49 PM Oh, and you know what? I'm down with Sheffield. Bring it on, Gary! Welcome to the Mets! Make us proud! Kong76 Apr 03 2009 07:00 PM I'll feel better after a coupla three run ding dongs. Frayed Knot Apr 04 2009 05:55 AM ="Kong76":daiwlvuq]Yeah, but two completely different types of dislike.[/quote:daiwlvuq] Egg-Zactly! Actually, I never really disliked Glavine anyway but even so, there's 'pre-dislike' simply because a guy's an accomplished opponent and there's dislike because he comes across as a fuckin' asshole. Chipper, for instance, would be type A and I'd have no problem rooting for him in orange & blue. With Sheff on the other hand - while I'm not going to root for him to fail (an increasingly popular activity for some Met fans it seems) - it's going to be tough to get the warm and fuzzies going.

Interesting choice; I like it.

That's a great thread.

="Benjamin Grimm":1c2fy3mi]How were you able to find that during a time when the archives index is busted?[/quote:1c2fy3mi] No wonder I couldn't find my lyrics to "Hey Doug Mientkiewicz" this morning. Benjamin Grimm Mar 30 2009 01:00 PM See "Bitch to the Admins." I hope to get it fixed tomorrow. Meanwhile, I had forgotten that Valadius was using "Creator of Nightcrawler and the Jake Monster" as his automatic signature line. Sheesh. Edgy DC Mar 30 2009 01:00 PM Searching with The Google. metirish Mar 30 2009 01:11 PM "Creator of Nightcrawler and the Jake Monster" tough to beat that.....funny to read back over it. Val proud as a new father with his nicknames. seawolf17 Mar 30 2009 01:14 PM That's a great thread. Benjamin Grimm Mar 30 2009 01:45 PM This is the Nightcrawler thread that I remember best: http://archives.cranepoolforum.net/2300/f1_t2382.shtml metirish Mar 30 2009 01:59 PM Best post ever by Val. Not everyone would share like that. Someone should tell the Seattle fans who Mr. Cellophane is.

="Benjamin Grimm"]Did Billy Joel sing the WKRP theme? Yeah, no kidding. Now I'm even more confused than I was by a two-week-early IGT.

The opening sentence of that article reads almost as though Frank Robinson and Nick Lachey were going to perform together.

Ha! Get me Valadius on line one. ="soupcan":3gjwn732]How about 'Dan'?[/quote:3gjwn732] I thought I read somewhere last year he doesn't like "Dan," which is why he goes by "Daniel." Centerfield Mar 30 2009 09:01 AM I vote for "Black Mamba". SteveJRogers Mar 30 2009 10:28 AM ="seawolf17":3dbbq9qq]How about Nightcrawler?[/quote:3dbbq9qq] HA! Along the same vein, there is a guy on a NYC sports talk show that is pushing a nickname on Murphy that was the name of some piece of equipment used by firefighters. I don't remember what it was, but he was saying that it is a versatile piece of equipment, the way Murphy is a versatile player. And it ties into the NYFD's Irish heritage. Heh, sadly it falls into the "its not good if you need to explain it in more than 5 words" category. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Mar 30 2009 10:59 AM ="SteveJRogers":16szyq4v]="seawolf17":16szyq4v]How about Nightcrawler?[/quote:16szyq4v] HA! Along the same vein, there is a guy on a NYC sports talk show that is pushing a nickname on Murphy that was the name of some piece of equipment used by firefighters. I don't remember what it was, but he was saying that it is a versatile piece of equipment, the way Murphy is a versatile player. And it ties into the NYFD's Irish heritage. Heh, sadly it falls into the "its not good if you need to explain it in more than 5 words" category.[/quote:16szyq4v] I think you're thinking of "halligan"-- used for prying/punching/twisting/doorbreaking... no word on whether it's from Germany. Not bad. Howzabout "Hacksaw"-- he's a bit of more of a wood-chopper than a "hammer", offensively speaking. OlerudOwned Mar 30 2009 11:40 AM ="metirish":2bai1n7j]Yeah it's a very British/Irish soccer style thing too....every player gets a O or a SY added to their name....[/quote:2bai1n7j] It's huge in hockey, too. I could practically go down the whole Rangers roster like that. Bettsy, Orrsy, Korps, Staalsy, Gomer, Cally, Nazzy. It's a shame that nobody on the team actually uses Lauri Korpikoski's fan-adaopted nickname, Korpedo. Edgy DC Mar 30 2009 11:55 AM The News still hasn't cleared up the error. Nymr83 Mar 30 2009 12:20 PM ="Centerfield":35p2gq1m]I vote for "Black Mamba".[/quote:35p2gq1m] Already taken by Manny Ramirez. That guy is just poisonous to clubhouses. soupcan Mar 30 2009 12:41 PM The Nightcrawler & Black Mamba references have gone completely over my head. metirish Mar 30 2009 12:44 PM Nightcrawler brings back fun memories, Val at his best I think. I would hope the archives have that old nicknames thread. Centerfield Mar 30 2009 12:49 PM Black Mamba was the nickname given to himself by Kobe Bryant. Say what you want about other nicknames, the height of douchebaggery is trying to give yourself a cool sounding nickname and being the only one to use it. Edgy DC Mar 30 2009 12:50 PM The birth of Nightcrawler: http://archives.cranepoolforum.net/1700/f1_t1720.shtml Benjamin Grimm Mar 30 2009 12:53 PM How were you able to find that during a time when the archives index is busted? I'm rather impressed. seawolf17 Mar 30 2009 12:57 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":1c2fy3mi]How were you able to find that during a time when the archives index is busted?[/quote:1c2fy3mi] No wonder I couldn't find my lyrics to "Hey Doug Mientkiewicz" this morning. Benjamin Grimm Mar 30 2009 01:00 PM See "Bitch to the Admins." I hope to get it fixed tomorrow. Meanwhile, I had forgotten that Valadius was using "Creator of Nightcrawler and the Jake Monster" as his automatic signature line. Sheesh. Edgy DC Mar 30 2009 01:00 PM Searching with The Google. metirish Mar 30 2009 01:11 PM "Creator of Nightcrawler and the Jake Monster" tough to beat that.....funny to read back over it. Val proud as a new father with his nicknames. seawolf17 Mar 30 2009 01:14 PM That's a great thread. Benjamin Grimm Mar 30 2009 01:45 PM This is the Nightcrawler thread that I remember best: http://archives.cranepoolforum.net/2300/f1_t2382.shtml metirish Mar 30 2009 01:59 PM Best post ever by Val. Not everyone would share like that. Someone should tell the Seattle fans who Mr. Cellophane is.