Vic Sage

i'm a definite [u:2et6bhtk]yes [/u:2et6bhtk]on Henderson and Blyleven, and i could go either way on Rice, Raines and Trammell. No others need apply.

]Joe Smith should be fine for another spot. He's still young, and I see no reason why his performance against lefties can't improve if you can see no reason, you're not looking very closely. Generally, side-armers and sub-mariners (of the non-Atlantean kind) have a harder time getting out the opposite side hitters, because of the angle that the ball is coming at them from. At least, that's what i've read. I imagine there have been exceptions. Kent Tekulve was a closer. ]That tells me we have three holes to fill: a closer, obviously, and two workhorse/set-up guys so, that's the top 3 guys. And other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?

in evaluating HOF credentials, Bill James' the HOF Monitor and HOF Standards formulas are useful tools. The Monitor attempts to measure the likelihood of induction based on a wide range of accomplishments. The Standards test tries to measure the actual value of his accomplishments. You can look at these numbers for each player, and measure them against the average HOFer, rather than using the lowest ranked HOFer as a threshhold, which only serves to bring the level ever downwards. avg HOF standards = 50 / avg HOF Monitor = 100 (130 = a lock) 2009: * Rickey Henderson - 52 / 186 (BI = 50! - 1st ballot) * Blyleven, Bert - 50 / 120.5 (borderline-yes) - Raines, Tim - 46 / 90 {borderline) - Trammell, Alan - 36 / 118 {borderline) - Rice, Jim - 43 / 146 {Black Ink test=33 (above 27 avg), borderline) - final year of eligibility - McGwire, Mark - 42 / 169 [bI =36] (blackballed) Dawson, Andre - 43 / 118 {borderline-no) Mattingly, Don - 34.1 / 133 {borderline-no) Parker, Dave - 41 / 129 ({borderline-no) Morris, Jack - 39 / 122 {borderline-no) Murphy, Dale - 34 / 115 (BI = 31) {borderline-no) John, Tommy - 44 / 111 {borderline-no) - final year of eligibility Smith, Lee - 13 /135 {borderline-no) Baines, Harold - 42 / 66.5 {no) new nominees: *David Cone (borderline - no): Black Ink: 19 (Average HOFer ≈ 40) Gray Ink: 165 (Average HOFer ≈ 185) HOF Standards: 39.0 (Average HOFer ≈ 50) HOF Monitor: 103.0 (Likely HOFer > 100) 1-and-done former Mets: Jay Bell Jesse Orosco Mo Vaughn others: Ron Gant Mark Grace Dan Plesac Greg Vaughn Matt Williams [edited to reflect final ballot]

while i agree that specialization is not a good strategy in terms of constructing a bullpen, I do think its appropriate when deploying one... you have to put the guys you have in situations in which they are most likely to succeed. So, if Omar gives Manuel a similarly constructed bullpen in 09, then asking Schoenweis to get out RHers, or Joe Smith to get out LHers, is just asking for trouble.

the project has already had 4 screenwriters, and the director is a music video guy who did the CHARLIES ANGELS movies, so i have little hope that this will be more than a turd. the SARAH CONNOR CHRONICLES tv series, however, is quite good.

If true, this is pointless for the Mets. Furcal's value is as a SS. He's not worth as much as a 2bman, and not really much more than Castillo, who we are currently overpaying.

Funny, sexy, baseball. vs idiot savante no contest.

Yup * * © KC, all rights reserved.

she was even hotter in HOWARD THE DUCK, but i don't see any votes for that one.

you go, Edge! Preach it, baby!

double feh

feh

metsmarathon wrote: the hard. it's the hard that makes it good. if it wasn't hard, anybody could do it.

they should do the All-star game there, to celebrate the connection between the past and present that is quintessentially baseballian. Logistics would be tough, but if Cooperstown knew it was getting that game every year, it would build the infrastructure to support it, cuz it would make sick money for that little town.

i think Ollie will get a 5th year, but not necessarily more $$/yr.

i'm wit Edgy. Orange Whip? Orange Whip? 3 Orange Whips...

really frikkin good movie.

It's not what arm you throw with, it's who you can get out. Affeldt is better than Beimel, even against righties. Show and Feliciano are specialists. I say "boo, Omar".

]Because you advocated in another thread treating the Dodgers not as Met forebears but as Met enemies. Didn't you? No, i rejected your assertion that anyone offended by the Jackie Robinson Rotunda, with its "42" tribute, was making a real "logical stretch". While i have no feelings about it one way or the other, I offered as an example, not myself but my parents and other Mets fans of their generation who were abandoned by the Dodgers and would, therefore, not necessarily enjoy having their new stadium built as a tribute to their long-hated Dodgers , and that these feelings were not at all illogical. At which point you accused my of arguing for sport, so i stopped participating in that thread. There is no doubt as to the role of the Dodgers as progenitors of the Mets. Anyone who wants to use their body as a billboard for such an assertion runs no risk of rebuke from me... at least not on those grounds.

]Jim C. also annoys Vic Sage by loving the '55 Dodgers on his other arm. ritual scarring annoys me on principle, but why do you think this would annoy me in particular?

my preference would be to drop both... off a cliff.

]...They need a few more reliable arms, and to stop relying on so many unreliable arms. I can see them adding a new setup guy or two, someone like Beimel, perhaps. And I wouldn't be at all surprised if they gave Chad Cordero a shot. Ben, you say you want to add more reliable arms, and then you call for signing a guy coming off a serious arm injury, and another guy who allowed a very high rate of inherited runners to score. That's just GiG thinking.

I'd prefer they take a more creative course than simply writing the biggest check to the guy with the most saves currently available. big bux closers make me nervous. And F-Rod's peripherals seem to be in somewhat of a decline, despite the saves. There, i said it.

what are "DINKies"?

="Willets Point":3ctoqhfp]I don't approve of this. Eminent domain is pretty evil.[/quote:3ctoqhfp] Spock said "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few... or the one". filthy Vulcan commie. Benjamin Grimm Nov 14 2008 09:57 AM The Daily News, in its article about this, is still saying "near Shea Stadium" instead of "near Citi Field." I like the idea of this project. I'd prefer to see it get done without eminent domain, though. Hopefully all the landowners will end up happy with the way it turns out. Edgy DC Nov 14 2008 10:01 AM Eminent domain for commercial development isn't about the needs of the many. Willets Point Nov 14 2008 10:01 AM ="Edgy DC":1ylk3h5q]="John Cougar Lunchbucket":1ylk3h5q]Gotta love the term "20% affordable housing." What does that makes the majority of it?[/quote:1ylk3h5q] Vacant luxury condoms waiting for DINKies to get their insane consumer confidence back.[/quote:1ylk3h5q] Damn! The rich even have luxury condoms for their dinkies. How are they different from regular condoms and why do they need to demolish so many businesses to store them near Citifield? Vic Sage Nov 14 2008 10:03 AM what are "DINKies"? Willets Point Nov 14 2008 10:05 AM ="Vic Sage":35oihk9c]what are "DINKies"?[/quote:35oihk9c] Penises. Edgy DC Nov 14 2008 10:06 AM Double Income No Kids --- a key demographic that helped bring high property costs back to American cities in recent years. metirish Nov 14 2008 10:09 AM I'll believe all this when I see it , like The Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn. John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 14 2008 10:14 AM It's not like the city sees eminent domain as anything but a last resort. It's all about the benjamins for these businesses, and so getting the city in as tight a jam as possible with the threat of a major asskicking drawnout lawsuit is one means to squeeze the most from it. This was on the editorial page in the Snooze the other day. I'm sure someone on Bloomy's staff did the ghostwriting, but its not like the biz owners on the other side are saying things without lawyer approval neither. ] Why I'm glad I sold my Willets Point property to the city By Carlos Canal Tuesday, November 11th 2008, 9:46 PM For more than 20 years, my family business, Flushing Towing, has been operating at Willets Point, Queens, where the city wants to clean up the land and build housing, parks, hotels and stores. The City Council is set to vote Thursday on whether to move forward with the city's plan to develop the site - the area right next door to the new Citi Field and close to LaGuardia Airport. Willets Point has been polluted and dirty since I can remember - even before I started my business here. The big landowners are fighting the city. They don't want us to sell our land. But people who want to stop this development need to hear what Willets Point is really like. They need to hear the story of my business, and why I decided to sell. Flushing Towing has three tow trucks, and our clients include anyone whose car breaks down in the five boroughs, in New Jersey or even in Connecticut. We tow cars back here to Willets Point or to another garage nearby to fix. At first, we were renting a lot, and then about six or seven years ago, we bought a 4,000-square-foot lot. I came to America when I was 18 years old from Cali, Colombia. I live in Flushing with my family, and part of my family still lives in Colombia. When I first heard about the city's project to develop Willets Point, I was not very interested in what was happening. The big landowners in Willets Point came around and said that the city was trying to steal the land. They told the small businesses to not talk to the city, and they are still pressuring owners and workers. They are using the small guys to push against the project. You get tired of this place. It's a disgrace. It's too dirty. It's filled with garbage and dust, and there are potholes everywhere. You can't keep anything in our shop clean. The area is filled with rats. If you put a piece of bread in the middle of Willets Point, a thousand rats would run out and attack it. There isn't a place like this anywhere else in New York City. The only people who come down here are people who don't want to pay too much to fix their cars. We worked with the city, and they explained the project to develop Willets Point - and then we agreed to sell our property. When we made a deal, the big businesses asked us why. But the big guys have a bigger interest in the property, and they make more money here. The city paid us more than we paid for it. For me, that was a good deal. I think everyone in Willets Point is different, and you have to find what is right for you. Some people around here think their land is worth a gold mine. They think they'll get a lot of money for their land. But no one will buy it. And why would anyone want to? This place is worse than an eyesore. It's not healthy and it needs to be cleaned up. My company is going to move to a better location in Queens. It's going to be better for us. We will have access to the same highways. We need space to park and store cars, and the new site gives us more room to expand. We are going to spend some money and buy another truck and maybe pay more drivers. It's going to be clean, and we will have sewers and bathrooms. The city has to do something with this property. It's disgusting, and you can't work here because it makes you sick. I think what Mayor Bloomberg wants to do at Willets Point is good for Corona, is good for Flushing, is good for Queens and is good for the city. I hope others, including members of the City Council, can understand that. Canal is the owner and operator of Flushing Towing, a family-owned business that has operated out of Willets Point for two decades. metirish Nov 14 2008 10:17 AM I read that and I thought it was funny , I was thinking that when the guy signed the contract that putting his name to that article above was part of the deal. Edgy DC Nov 14 2008 10:21 AM I think he got a nice incentive for his 12 paragraphs. Centerfield Nov 14 2008 10:36 AM Not mentioned by Carlos Canal from Cali, Colombia is why the city would allow Willets Point to exist in this filthy state, without sewers, and only now seeks to clean it up since a developer of their choice has plans to develop it. I can see both arguments for eminent domain, but since I don't own any land there and would like a better environment when I go to games, I'm all for this one. Go Bloomy. Build me some places to take the kids. Edgy DC Nov 14 2008 11:00 AM Since I don't own any land there and would like a better environment when I go to games, I'm all for the city bringing the full range of utilities to the area that the property owners should be entitled to. Valadius Nov 14 2008 12:35 PM If nothing else, this will FINALLY allow for a sewer system. metirish Nov 14 2008 12:36 PM ="Valadius":2jrwc3or]If nothing else, this will FINALLY allow for a sewer system.[/quote:2jrwc3or] For shitty field? John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 14 2008 12:46 PM It's not like you can go build on unimproved land then demand sewer pipes as if its your right. You notice these bizzes aren;t clamoring for that since they know that would mean the end of them anyway. Edgy DC Nov 14 2008 12:51 PM I thought you could.