Vic Sage

89 wins second place second wild card win the play-in game, lose the divisional series.

Edgy MD wrote: With buzz from both the manager and GM that (1) they intend to go north with their best 25, and (2) it stains credulity to claim that Alonso isn't one of those best 25, I think we can conclude that it's more likely than not that he makes the team at this point. A lot can still happen. He can make it instead of Smitty (who has options), in addition to Smitty (who would become the fifth outfielder as well a his co-firstbaseman, or he could tank or strain a quad and not make it at all. We have a two-game day, possibly with a start from both of them, so today might have a lot to tell us. if they're taking the best 25, why is it assumed they're taking Hechavarria over Guillorme?

i didn't like him when i liked him. i sure as shit don't like him now.

As we get down to the end of ST, i think Guillorme, Davis, Dom Smith and Alonzo have all hit their way onto the opening day rosters (assuming Lowrie and Frazier are both on the DL). lineup: Nimmo* (cf) McNeil* (3b/lf) Cano* (2b) Alonzo (1b) Conforto* (Rf) Ramos © Davis (lf/3b) Rosario (ss) bench: d'Arnaud © Lagares (Of) Broxton (Of) Guillorme* (ss/2b/3b) D.Smith* (1b/Lf/Ph) as players come off the DL, I think the players likely to go down are: [Lowrie#] = Guillorme* [Frazier] = Davis [Cespedes] = Broxton, Lagares or D.Smith and 6th-7th relief pitchers? Avilan* Dowdy (or another spot starter)

Edgy MD wrote: Color-by-number script missing more than a few numbers. I don't get how it escaped development so underwritten. Plus, the 90s references seem to have come from somebody that didn't really remember the 90s too well. Also, there hasn't been a big movie that so shamelessly offered itself as a military recruitment tool since Top Gun. yup. I still liked it because, you know, superheroes. But its not particularly good.

me too. better giving a symbolic point to Wright than any of Swarzak, Dom Smith, or AGon, who all did waaaaay more harm than good.

Edgy MD wrote: I'd rather that trend be responded to by one team zagging while everybody else was zigging. Twenty-five is plenty. Twenty-six will be more of a license for increase reliever use and increased specialization. not if, as reported, they limit pitchers to 13/26 (or 14/28). Then its specifically making room for more bench players (laying the groundwork for the inevitable DH to come)

well played, sir.

[u]2018 Mets:[/u] 1. DeGrom 2. Nimmo 3. Syndegaard 4. Wheeler 5. Conforto 6. McNeil 7. Lugo 8. Matz 9. Cabrera 10. Frazier 11. Familia 12. Cespedes 13. Rosario 14. Bautista 15. Plawecki 16. Mesoraco 17. Flores 18. Lagares 19. DrSmith 20. Zamora 21. Gsellman 22. Vargas 23. Bruce 24. Blevins 25. Bashlor [i]The following did significantly more harm than good, or contributed too little to consider, but i had to list somebody:[/i] 26. Oswalt 27. Jackson 28. Peterson 29. Rhame 30. Wright [i]as well as:[/i] Gonzalez Do.Smith Reyes [i]*(despite the number of ABs they had, i could not in good conscience list Reyes, Gonzalez, or Do.Smith, because they all hurt the time more and more with every appearance. they would have helped the Mets more by not playing at all. I did more for the team by not playing than they did by playing).[/i] guillorme Nido Harvey Swarzak Robles Ramos Sewald

Dom should platoon with Frazier. If Frazier shows he's healthy and can hit, trade him to anybody who'll take him. Then play JD, until Alonzo comes up.

It is riddled with all the tropes and clichés of the "rock star biopic" sub-genre, but, unlike Judd Apatow's "WALK HARD: DEWEY COX STORY", a hilarious sendup of those clichés, BORAP is actually sincere about it. And Remi Malek, a great actor whom I love in MR. ROBOT, is acting with his teeth. Still, to give it it's due, the movie looks pretty great and the concert scenes are powerfully effective.

Face value would be higher for those 10% of games where they dont end up on sale. But that wasnt my main point. My main point was if ALL the teams heeded the call for "more spending" the Mets wouldn'f get any better I realize it isn't your main point ,but your secondary point is still incorrect. Price is determined by demand and elasticity of the market, not by an incremental increase in payroll. If they could charge more for tickets without reducing overall demand, they would do so, regardless of payroll costs. In fact, if they found a way to cut payroll in half, do you really think ticket prices would then go DOWN? Its not like they're operating with a small margin. media money and revenue sharing has made payroll a non-issue.

SHAZAM! S - wisdom of Solomon H - strength of Hercules A - stamina of Atlas Z - power of Zeus A - courage of Achilles M - speed of Mercury

Matt Harvey will be out for at least ten days after straining his glute. well at least now he's someone ELSE's pain in the ass.

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: They also issued a dignified uni number (7) so I'm not crossing him off the list unless or until we sign Bryce Harper, then I'll reassess. I assume you're saying this for comedic effect, But I would wager that the signing of Harper would not have an iota of impact on Blanco's role on this team. It may impact who plays CF in Syracuse, however. But we'll never know, anyway, i guess.

Now that ST is here, it's time to place your bets. I think they start with Alonzo in AAA, for contract purposes; I think they start with 8 in the pen (I'd prefer 7, with a legit backup SS, like guillorme), and hopefully go down to 7 when Alonzo comes up in a month (particularly since JD Davis can give them some mop-up innings if necessary); And while I hope they can move any or all of Frazier, Lagares, d'Arnaud, and Vargas, I don't expect it to happen. Therefore: lineup Nimmo (Rf)* Lowrie (3b)# Cano (2b)* Ramos © Conforto (Lf)* Frazier (1b) [Alonzo, after a month] Lagares (Cf) P- Rosario (SS) bench McNeil* d'Arnaud Broxton Davis rotation DeGrom Syndegaard Matz* Wheeler Vargas* bullpen Diaz Familia Wilson* Lugo Gsellman Avilan* Dowdy D.Smith [goes down when Alonzo comes up] Next!

Yes, he's promising. He could be the best home-grown hitter we've developed since Wright. But he has no glove, no speed, and has a lot of swing-and-miss in his game, so he could also end up as a RHed Lucas Duda, but without the walks. Not to say he shouldn't be given a shot, but I remain cautious.

apparently, FX is doing a series based on the movie: https://www.slashfilm.com/what-we-do-in-the-shadows-trailer-official/https://www.slashfilm.com/what-we-do-in-the-shadows-trailer-official/

yes, because those movies are really funny. Mockumentaries don't have to be appreciated ironically; they can be really good, like SPINAL TAP, and some of the other Chris Guest films. The characters lack self-awareness, but the humor is real. But SHADOWS is just tedious. The joke is really in the concept more than the execution, whereas the Guest mockumentaries are equally funny in their execution as they are in their conception.

Burnett, Avilan or Zamora as 2nd lefty in the pen? or somebody else?

=smg58 post_id=2445 time=1549477081 user_id=62] I think that anything that reduces strategy does not serve the best interests of the game. Especially if all the reductions in strategy benefit the offense. A boom in offensive production has not helped attendance levels, so stop assuming that's what people want. This does not mean that LOOGYs are necessarily a good thing. Having a pitcher on your roster who can't give you 60 good innings, especially if you're also trying to pitch your starters less, can certainly backfire. But the manager and GM should make those decisions, right or wrong, not the league.

I agree that the mundanity (?) was intentional, but that didn't make it any easier for me to sit through. It's like campy stuff that is intentionally bad is still bad. Some people like such movies ironically (my son loves THE ROOM, for example, and the entire oeuvre of Neil Breen, the Ed Wood of contemporary filmmakers). But I tend not to like things ironically.

I loved it, too, but sometimes it felt to me like I was watching a 3-D movie without the glasses.

I always liked him more than his production warranted. Now that mantle has passed to TJ Rivera.

* A three-batter minimum for pitchers - I think specialization has hurt the game, from DHs to LOOGies and ROOGies. It rewards limited players, and leads to over-managing for the slightest of statistical advantages while slowing the pace of play. I'd prefer to see pitchers build careers on being able to get anybody out. With regard to the concern over an "injury loophole", where guys fake an injury (at instruction of manager) to allow for manipulation of the rule, simply require any pitcher taken out for an injury under these circumstances to be placed on a 5-day DL, so the pitcher couldn't be active for 5 days and the team couldn't fill that slot unless the pitcher goes on a longer DL (10, 15, 30 or 60 day). I think teams would then think twice about such manipulations if they were then forced to lose a reliever for a week and had to play shorthanded (literally). * A universal designated hitter - see above, re: specialization. But I'd prefer to see both leagues play by the same set of rules, whatever they are. *A single trade deadline before the All-Star break - whatever. * A 20-second pitch clock - yes, please. And call a K on a hitter who fails to get into the box in time. I hate watching them readjust their gloves and their dicks after ever pitch. * The expansion of rosters to 26 men, with a 12-pitcher maximum - yes to expansion, no to roster construction limitations. They are also talking about reducing September rosters from 40 to 28, which I also agree with. Frankly, i'd prefer to see larger rosters at the BEGINNING of the season, where teams are still trying to figure out who their best options are, then at the END of the season, where teams in a pennant race suddenly have to play against a team that's out of it, who have 20 pitchers they can use in a game. * Draft advantages for winning teams and penalties for losing teams - I'd like to see exactly how this would work, but I'm not morally opposed to punishing non-competitiveness, which is often a strategy rather than a circumstance. * A study to lower the mound - are we in an offensive drought of some sort? I hadn't noticed. If this is to cut down on Ks, I don't know why we would. GMs have figured out that guys who hit for more power (regardless of K rate) are worth more to an offense than those who put the ball in play more often (where random chance starts to become a bigger factor in outcomes). They also value guys who get on base, of course, but that doesn't have to come just from hits. So high SLG & OB rates are valued, and Ks are less relevant, and hitters have adjusted their swings to this new marketplace. I'm not seeing a problem that needs to be fixed. *A rule that would allow two-sport amateurs to sign major league contracts - sure.