Vic Sage

I don't object to the "Robinson Rotunda" as such, or the Ebbets homage at all. What bothers me is that, in the absence of any NYGiants references (other than the black and orange outfield wall colors), or, for that matter, any Mets references (going so far as to react badly to the adhoc Gooden graffiti situation), the Dodger stuff is just so disproportionate. Yes, Jackie Robinson is worthy of tribute, but he's just as worthy of tribute in every major league city in America. I love the big screen tvs in the rotunda showing Robinson clips, and the big 42 is fine, and his words and philosophy are inspiring, but couldn't the rotunda have also celebrated Roberto Clemente (another player who never had anything whatsoever to do with the Mets), who is a revered player in the Latin community (very big in NYC), who died while bringing disaster relief to Nicaragua. Or a Giants great like Willie Mays, who at least ended his career back here in NYC. If it wasn't JUST about Robinson and Ebbetts field, i don't think many fans would have a problem. But so far, thats all it is, and so the Gooden thing gets overblown (by both sides), and the issue about their plans for a Mets HOF become more pressing and makes them look even worse. New building... same ole Mets.

you preach it, my brother.

]In truth, there's only one appropriate name for this ballpark -- The House That George Built. In truth, when a German industrialist erects an architectural tribute to the greatness of his folk and the glory of its past, there's only one appropriate name for it -- Nuremberg.

]Plus we've got something to hold them to. unless the "something" to which you refer is an open flame, i'll be dissatisfied.

Reyes - 2.25 Murphy - 1.75 Santos - 1.5 Delgado - 1.5 Figueroa - 1.25 Beltran - 0.75 Green - 0.50 Sheffield - 0.25 Feliciano - 0.25

Thomas was the superior hitter, both at his peak and for his career. a 2x MVP, with around 10 seasons amongst top 5 OPS+, he was among the most dominant hitters of his era. Thome was very good, but his numbers don't really compare favorably, either at his peak, or for his career. Regarding the DH factor, it was not like Thome was an up the middle player or a GG corner man. His ticket to Cooperstown will not be punched because of his glove, so i don't see that as making up the difference between him and Big Hurt. "niceness" aside, i don't think ite even that close a call, as between the 2.

Santana - 5.75 Putz - 1.25 Rodriguez - 1.25 Reyes - 1.25 Castillo - 0.5

This season, I went in on a 15-game Saturday plan with a friend who used to have the same plan for upperdeck boxes, 1st row behind home. The best he could do this season was upperdeck reserved in LF, section 533, in fair territory. The "Saturday Plan" also now includes 5 week night games. Avg price/per ticket = $20, which is nice, but with $18 parking, $6 pretzels, etc, its still an expensive day out. I took my daughter to the game on Saturday. The parking lot i used to go to was filled and the closest lot was in the marina. The stadium is certainly attractive enough from the outside. We entered through the LF entrance (equivalent to Gate A at Shea), and it immediately struck me how similar in look and feel the park is to Keyspan in Coney Island... but with 2 extra decks. From the color of the stone, to the openness of the walkways, to the recessed food stands, to the standing room rails with cup holders all around the stadium, to the transparent plexiglass walls lining the outside staircases in the stands, there is a literal and figurative openness and breeziness to the atmosphere that was quite a welcome relief to the tomb-like quality of Shea. I was expecting a Dodger-Ebbets ambiance, but i didn't get that, particularly. I looked at the outfield wall and see a Giants color scheme of black walls with Orange stripes marking the home run and foul lines and orange numbers indicating distance from home plate. Of course, we hadn't entered thru the "Jackie Robinson Rotunda", so we didn't get hit over the head with that at the outset. We got our food ($32 for 1 hot dog, 1 grilled chicken sandwich, 1 order fries, 1 order onion rings, 2 medium iced teas) and went to our seats. I heard, when we were buying our season plan, that the "upper deck" of Citi (now called "the promenade") would be much closer than the old upper deck, and there wasn't going to be a bad seat in the house. unlike shea, there would be an intimacy to the ballpark, and seats would face toward home plate. That's what they said, alright. And, grateful just to be in the park, we believed them. But don't. As expected, row 7 in section 533 is exposed to the elements, so we were broiling in the unpexpectedly robust April sun. Nobody's fault, of course. And some people like to be dry roasted. I'm not one of the them. But i took the opportunity to take in the view and here's what you see from LF, Section 533, just a bit to the fair side of the foul poll, 7 rows up: Not much. Oh, you see a great deal of stadium advertising all right. In fact, i don't think there is a square inch of stadium wall that isn't covered with ads. But thats ok. Most stadiums are like that... they always were. "(hit the sign and win a car!"). It even adds its own kitchy charm. what's really the issue is what you cannot see... ... like LF and CF. I don't mean you can't see the LF and CF walls... i mean you can't see the fielders in their normal fielding positions, from the LF line to the Right-Center "415" marker. When any average fly is hit to LF or CF, you'll have to take somebody's word for how the play came out. ... or like the jumbo tron. The big tv and the scoreboard form a " /\" in CF, so from LF seats, you can see the scoreboard, but not the jumbo tron. I also looked all over the ballpark for the o-o-t scoreboard, and i couldn't find it until the guy in front of me pointed up behind me. Oh, apparently the o-o-t scoreboard is on a separate marquis almost overhead and entirely unviewable from LF. Everybody we talked to in the section was grumpy. "All these years, all this money, all this planning, and they couldn't build a park with decent sightlines?" was the general consensus, expressed with an increasingly drunken an dagitated hostitlity by fans who'd invested 10--20 years in getting better and better seats, only to be forced out by price and availability to the 7th circle of hell. To cool off, my daughter and i went inside and took a walk around the stadium. Out of the sun, it was quite comfortable, and there was any number of standing-room vantages from around the park with better views of the goings on. Almost everywhere were the views better, in fact, but NOWHERE did we find unobstructed views. We didn't get to field boxes behind home, of course, so i can't say for certain that there are NO good views in the park... but it did seem that way. certainly, i'm hearing the frustration everywhere, including the press box, where the broadcasters can't see whose warming up in the bullpens, nor can they see down the RF line, apparently. the vaunted food court in center field, offering a wide variety of over-priced vituals, is almost completely blocked off from any view of the field, except for a few picnic tables, but you can walk across the "bridge" in Right Center to the "Pepsi Porch" area for more viewing areas, and more interesting edibles. We made our way, eventually, to the Robinson Rotunda, and its all very nice, if utterly irrelevant to the Mets. Where's the gallery of Mets greats? or even Giants greats? there is none, unless you count Doc Gooden's graffiti, or the subtle orange & black color scheme of the OF wall... a wall primarily viewable from only the best seats in the house. We got to see a dominant pitching performance by Santana, and the bullpen, and we got a Mets victory... and we even got a free santana bag. But, all in all, i'm not looking forward to going back. Which makes me feel just terrible.

I'll be in the Promenade, Section 533

]Who is this Piazza seems to have from behind? Piazza had a press conference to deny that he had anybody from behind. heh heh heh heh... i'm sorry, but somebody had to do it.

paint the cars

surprise! Its me!

um, well if you see any closers on the wire, let me know. That a-hole autodraft gave me Joba and Wood as my only 2 closers. i hate autodraft.

don't forget the brief, if beloved, NY Sets

="metsguyinmichigan":gxmg8nss]Curt falls short of the HOF, I think.[/quote:gxmg8nss] Black Ink: Pitching - 42 (Average HOFer ≈ 40) Gray Ink: Pitching - 205 (Average HOFer ≈ 185) HOF Standards: Pitching - 46.0 (Average HOFer ≈ 50) HOF Monitor: Pitching - 171.0 (Likely HOFer > 100) He's a 3000 K pitcher, with a history of winning "big games" and has 3 rings. He's got at least 10 top 10 WHIP & ERA+ seasons. with 5 seasons in top 5 in Wins and 4 seasons in top 5 in CY voting. His career ERA+ of 127 is equal to that of Tom Seaver, Bob Gibson and John Smoltz. He was a power pitcher with impeccable control. He was just very good with Philly, but became a great pitcher at an old age, elevating his game when he went to Arizona, and then Boston, pitching through continuous injuries. Whether he was just an accumulator, and not great enough long enough is a legit question, and i'd say he's a close call either way, but i wouldn't have a problem with his enshrinement. dinosaur jesus Mar 23 2009 12:28 PM I think he's a Hall of Famer. His total wins and ERA might not look that impressive, but in the context of his time they're just fine. And the bloody sock is the best piece of theater in baseball history, whether he was faking it or not. Better than Ruth calling the home run, better than Gil Hodges and the shoeshine ball. Just fantastic stuff. I don't have to like the guy to give him that. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Mar 23 2009 12:30 PM ="Vic Sage":933k0xj3]="metsguyinmichigan":933k0xj3]Curt falls short of the HOF, I think.[/quote:933k0xj3] Black Ink: Pitching - 42 (Average HOFer ≈ 40) Gray Ink: Pitching - 205 (Average HOFer ≈ 185) HOF Standards: Pitching - 46.0 (Average HOFer ≈ 50) HOF Monitor: Pitching - 171.0 (Likely HOFer > 100) He's a 3000 K pitcher, with a history of winning "big games" and has 3 rings. He's got at least 10 top 10 WHIP & ERA+ seasons. with 5 seasons in top 5 in Wins and 4 seasons in top 5 in CY voting. His career ERA+ of 127 is equal to that of Tom Seaver, Bob Gibson and John Smoltz. He was a power pitcher with impeccable control. He was just very good with Philly, but became a great pitcher at an old age, elevating his game when he went to Arizona, and then Boston, pitching through continuous injuries. Whether he was just an accumulator, and not great enough long enough is a legit question, and i'd say he's a close call either way, but i wouldn't have a problem with his enshrinement.[/quote:933k0xj3] Plus, for those voters who are of the "Hey, I remember him!" variety (pro-Rice/anti-Blyleven), he has the 2001 and 2004 postseasons-- including Bloody Sock-- on the ol' mental resume. Edgy DC Mar 23 2009 12:35 PM I stop reading at 3000 Ks and "equal of Seaver and Gibson," you know? smg58 Mar 23 2009 01:00 PM He delivered in too many big games to not get in. dinosaur jesus Mar 23 2009 01:22 PM Equal of Seaver and Gibson--that's crap, ERA+ or not. But how about Dazzy Vance? They're both great strikeout pitchers who had their best years after they turned 30. Edgy DC Mar 23 2009 02:17 PM ="dinosaur jesus":1fnuyqbi]Equal of Seaver and Gibson--that's crap, ERA+ or not. But how about Dazzy Vance?[/quote:1fnuyqbi] Well, he threw 3261 innings, compared to Gibson's 3884 and Seaver's 4782 2/3 innings. And a lot of those extra innings are going to be late-game high-leverage types of thingies. So, no, he's no true equal. Nymr83 Mar 23 2009 08:03 PM I think Schilling compares unfavorably to Bert Blyleven because of the 1300 inning difference between them, and I'd be hard pressed to say he's a HOFer when Bert is still not in. If Bert was in I'd say Schilling should follow. Gwreck Mar 24 2009 12:40 AM 3.5 seasons with the Diamondbacks, but they were his best and where he won the WS MVP. 2 WS with Boston. Nearly 8 years with Philly, although some shortened by injury. First pennant. Which cap on the HOF plaque? Edgy DC Mar 24 2009 05:15 AM Depict him hatless, with the sock flung over his shoulder. John Cougar Lunchbucket Mar 24 2009 06:17 AM Schill was a Phil. Nymr83 Mar 24 2009 06:22 AM Schilling isn't exactly the poster child for "which hat should i wear"? but it is a growing problem with today's player movement, maybe blank caps are the way to go for some guys. duan Mar 24 2009 09:00 AM schilling's going to be a good barometer for the 'next generation' of pitchers who won't get near 300 wins. Glavine, Maddux & Johnson are the freaks that have been able to hang around for 300 (not yet for Johnson obviously) but then after them ain't NOBODY going to get there for a long time. Does that mean that there's no pitcher who deserves the HOF? I don't think so. DocTee Mar 24 2009 11:41 AM Rob Neyer makes a pretty convincing case for yes: [url:10l9m1oo]http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=4008946&name=Neyer_Rob[/url:10l9m1oo]

is that the one with Michael Caine? Yeah, that's a great one. Speaking of Michael Caine, my absolute favorite story about arrogant Brits colonizing that region is THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING, with Caine and Sean Connery.

what, you have a problem with the 1929 silent version? and the 1977 tv movie, with Beau Bridges? Actually, after seeing the 39 version, i have little patience for any versions of this piece of British imperialist propaganda, although i undertand the 2002 version takes a more revisionist view of the story, which would be refreshing. If you want to go down this road, though, I'd recommend such superior entries as Errol Flynn in CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE, Cary Grant in GUNGA DIN and Charlton Heston in KHARTOUM.

IMO, his point was not that asymmetry = character. To the contrary, i think. His point was that the assymetry of old ballparks were not merely an affectation.... they were the necessary consequence of urban ballparks having to adapt to very different urban landscapes. That those ballparks were integrated and a part of their urban settings made them more individualized, personal experience for their fans, and thus lovingly embraced ("even the ugly ones"), which is a perfectly valid architectural theory. It is one of the uniquey identifying charms of baseball that its outfield dimensions are unlimited, just as the lack of a clock renders the game theoretically unlimited. But his criticism of Citifield is that its asymmetry does NOT equal character; that it is, instead, an affectation that isolates it in its environment, and has been borrowed, instead, from a history that is not its own. Regardless, the stadium is attractive, and I'm still happy to have better sightlines and better amenities.

[u:18pxphc1]Marvel Studios Feature Film Pipeline[/u:18pxphc1] WOLVERINE - May 1, 2009 G.I. JOE - August 7, 2009 IRON MAN 2 - May 7, 2010 SPIDER-MAN 4 - May 6, 2011 THOR - June 17, 2011 CAPTAIN AMERICA - July 22, 2011 THE AVENGERS - May 4, 2012 http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/marvel-adjusts-movie-pipeline-schedule-for-spider-man-4-thor-captain-america-the-avengers/

I agree though, they are overused. I want to say Scorsese probably helped that become the vogue thing to do with the way he uses classic hits as the soundtracks to his films. but he didn't do that with AGE OF INNOCENCE, right? which is my point. The jarring anachronisms take you out of the story, and, even thematically, they're heavy-handed.

I've never partipated in a full-blown live auction rotisserie-type league before. It's a standard 5x5-Mixed league auction, with 12 teams (so far). Each team has a $100 budget to fill 21 slots (Cx2, 1b,2b,ss,3b,CI, MI, ofx5, Px8), with a taxi squad of up to 15 slots. Minimum bids are $0.25. Teams will be brought up randomly, then owners nominate players from that team for auction. I need to know good sources for esatablishing auction $$ values, and for good strategies in this format. THOUGHTS?

="metsguyinmichigan":15sn2zsu]Lunchpail's grandfather is a damn good painter! A professional?[/quote:15sn2zsu] yes, he is! And I've been a fan of his work since i was a kid. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Springer metsguyinmichigan Mar 09 2009 11:26 AM Wow! He's not just a professional, he's Big Time! That's really cool.

flawed but definitely worth seeing. Captures the spirit, themes, characterizations of the comic, without sacrificing much in the way of narrative. I actually preferred some of the narrative "fixes". But the cast, while spot on visually, were not uniformly great. Jackie Earl Haley was a perfectly psychotic yet sympathetic Rorshach; Denny made a great Comedian; Billy Crudup's vocal performance gives Dr. Manhattan the emotional distance required; and Patrick Wilson's Night Owl was a spot-on Clark Kent. But the women came off less well, as did the womanish Ozmandias. Some tech complaints: the makeup was grotesquely fake, from Nixon's nose, to Gugino's aging. And having to stare at Dr Manhattan's big blue CGIed weiner (especially in the front row of an IMAX theater) was a bit much. And the music cues were REALLY annoying. Why does everyone try to evoke 60s anti-war themes with the same 5 or 6 60s classics? It was so cliched and "on the nose", that it was laughable. Something symphonic, or electronic like the brief use of Glass's KOYANNISQATSI, would've been more appropriate. But that's more picking of nits than actual complaints of a significant nature. Overall, i thought it was as good as could be done to make the source material filmable.

there is no offer to match. LA pulled their latest "off the table" and are now insisting on dealing from scratch. I'm loving this.