Vic Sage

...Laura Ziskin, my producer, said, 'Well, the fans would much rather have Gwen make an introduction now, and you can do what you need to do or someone can do what they need to do in the fourth picture with her, but at least you've introduced her, and they would appreciate that.'" ..."Avi Arad, my partner and the former president of Marvel at the time, said to me, 'Sam, ... you're not paying attention to the fans enough...You need to think about them... The fans love Venom. He is the fan favorite... Please incorporate Venom. Listen to the fans now.' You know what fans appreciate? A good story, well told. Shoehorning characters in to appease the producers' notion of what their audience wants is a recipe for a crapfest. I still haven't seen the movie, but this description of Raimi's "creative process" doesn't fill me with hope.

Springer returned to draw a handful of stories for Marvel's black-and-white horror-comics magazines in 1974 and '75, and then sprang from title to title, penciling sporadic issues of The Avengers, Captain America, The Spectacular Spider-Man, and Spider-Woman, among others, and also inked many Marvel and DC Comics.

Johnny Dickshot wrote: Hey Vic, I flew to Chicago on Saturday too. Were you at te Cubs game? How about that old man who draws Spidey? Check out the Ted Williams portrait over his shoulder! i was there for a weekend series of events sponsored by the Dramatists Guild. As for the old man, you can check out the career of legendary comics artist Frank Springer at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Springer

sorry, Lubby. No review yet, cuz i haven't had a chance to see it. My friends can't believe i missed opening weekend. I guess i'm getting old. Actually, i had to fly to chicago saturday morning (flew back saturday nite!) so i didn't have much time to catch it. but that's no excuse, i realize.

Easley - 3.00 Wright - 2.00 Beltran - 1.50 Alou - 1.25 Lo Duca - 0.75 Heilman - 0.75 Glavine - 0.50 Feliciano - 0.25

]Does anyone know how capable of a bunter Delgado actually is? Bunting is not all that difficult, but it never ceases to amaze me the number of major league hitters that seem incapable of doing so. Well, that observation seems to argue that bunting is alot more difficult than you think... especially against ML pitchers throwing sinkers, curves, sliders, splits and 97-MPH fastballs up and in. I think bunting is not only more difficult than is being assumed here, it is a specific skill that, unless practiced routinely, is unlikely to be highly developed by guys who hit 30+HRs/yr. And a bad bunter can get his fingers broken. (I saw someone get hurt that way just the other day. who was that?). And we're expecting a non-bunting HR hitter to not just lay one down for a sacrifice, but to push it hard down the 3b line for a hit. He has to hit it hard enough and pull it down the line enough to get past the pitcher on a grass field. Why is that a "gimme"? I don't necessarily buy the "we need a baserunner" argument, either. We don't need a baserunner. we need 2 runs. we can get them any number of ways. While the odds of getting ONE run increase with a man on first/no out, the odds of getting TWO or more runs are significantly better with a man on 2nd or 3rd (or after a homerun). So, i don't think its quite so self-evident, CF, that taking the bat out of the hands of one of our main power guys is a no-brainer. That being said, if Delgado has some moderate level of skill at bunting (which he seems to have), it would be useful for him to try it a few times to try and break the shift and keep the defense honest, thus making him a more effective offensive player overall.

Johnny Dickshot wrote: Just wait till Delgado needs some time off! Lets bring Carp up NOW!!!

i think each thought should have its own sub-forum.

This officially ends the IGT. Please discuss today's game further on the main forum. That is all. Respectfully, The Thread Police

]it's not like having a slightly below average 2B = a "hole in our lineup." You're right. But neither is a slightly below average 2bman "decent" unless (as i said) by "decent" you mean below average. To me, decent means "not great, but ok", ie, better than mediocre. so maybe we're just having a definitional dispute. And i'll take Barfield, thank you very much. Heck, i'll still take Aurillia or Vidro. The more Easley plays, the more he'll be exposed. Maybe it won't matter, if Wright is finally waking up and everybody else stays productive. I guess i'm just distressed because a problem we all anticipated (Valentin either getting hurt or declining) has happened, and i don't like our options ... neither in the short-term nor, more importantly, in the long term. I think we've got long-term answers at every position EXCEPT 2b and C.

here is our off-season thread on "Second Base", where we discussed these very issues. http://www.getalifealready.com/cpf/archives/5100/f1_t5154.shtml some interesting things there. They signed Valentin within 2 weeks of the end of the season. They pursued Lugo but when he signed with BoSox in December, Omar declared them "satisfied" with Valentin at 2b. We watched Barfield get traded to Cleveland, saw Loretta, Belliard, DeRosa and Aurillia sign elsewhere, and made no play for Vidro.

]Easley's got decent pop (.405 career SLG), and has a pretty good eye at the plate, which allows him to have a decent OBP (career .328) despite not hitting for average (.251). A .328 OB% is NOT "decent", unless by decent you mean "below league average"... same is true of his "decent" pop. Easley would be adequate filling in here and there, or platooning against LHPs, but if he's our everyday 2bman for the next 6 weeks or so, we've got another hole in our lineup. Who is our top SS prospect right now?

Whatever the Mets thought or didn't think in the off-season, they went into the season without an answer at 2b other than "oh,well, lets resign Jose and hope for the best". If they didn't think he was capable of repeating, or at least approaching decent production, then re-signing him was irresponsible. And it wasn't like they waited till the last possible moment to re-sign him. As i recall (and my memory may be entirely faulty on this point, i'll grant you), they signed him pretty quickly after Lugo signed with Boston, without really exploring all other options... or at least that was how it seemed to me at the time. And Easley? He has sucked BHMC for most of his major league career. He may or may not have been an upgrade over Woodward, but he certainly doesn't add up to "oh, well... valentin has gone down but at least we have Damian Easley!" Anyway, i didn't bring it up to rehash what they did or didn't do in the off-season. I brought it up to explore the options about what, if anything, Omar should do NOW. Do we take this opportunity to address our long-term problem at this position by finding a Kelly Johnson in our system? Is there a trade for an adequate replacement available out there? Do we just ride it out with Easley/Gotay, with the hope that Valentin can come back in a month?

2B was a problem area this off-season, with nothing in the Mets pipeline at this position, for the forseeable future. The Mets answer was to re-sign Valentin, expecting him to repeat his excellent season. And, despite a bad start, Valentin had come around and WAS giving us similar production. But he's out 2-4 weeks with a partially torn ACL. And, at his age, it might take longer than that for him to return to any level of effective production. There is still nothing in the pipeline (Gotay and Anderson are barely adequate AAA players). So... Question: Is there anybody in the minors with whom we can pull a "Kelly Johnson"? If not, is there any point in trading for a Ron Belliard type?

Maine = 6 Beltran = 2 Wagner = 1 Schoenwiese = 0.5 Reyes = 0.5

Centerfield wrote: It's breakable. Kind of. it can't be broken by a pitcher that starts an inning, but it can be broken by a relief pitcher who comes in with no outs and at least 1 man on base.

OHernandez 4 Easley 2.25 Chavez 1.75 Green 0.5 Heilman 0.5 Schoenweis 0.5 Smith 0.5

Say, anybody here know how to "madison"?

Edgy DC wrote: 169 vs. 136 doesn't seem all that close, and, while I'm not big on runs created, I think 319 of them goes well further in 1989 than 318 today. That's true, but i was being deferential to the new golden boy. Wright's season, actually, was almost identical to Ventura's excellent 1999 season: Ventura (1999): OPS+ = 132 / TB = 311 / RC = 118 Wright (2006): OPS+ = 136 / TB = 309 / RC = 118 Neither of them was as good as Hojo at his peak, even if you factor in defensive superiority of Ventura and Wright.

1. Jose Reyes (2006) SS 2. John Olerud (1998) 1B 3. Mike Piazza (2000) C 4. Darryl Strawberry (1987) RF 5. Carlos Beltran (2006) CF 6. Bernard Gilkey (1996) LF 7. Howard Johnson (1989) 3B 8. Edgardo Alfonzo (2000) 2B Wright's 06 was very close, but did not top Hojo's 1989. Hojo (89): OPS+ = 169 / TB = 319 / RC = 119 Wright (06): OPS+ = 136 / TB = 309 / RC = 118 Dwight Gooden (1985) Tom Seaver (1971) Koosman (1968) David Cone (1988) Pedro Martinez (2005) I'd consider Matlack(72,74), Ojeda and Sid (86,88), Leiter (98,00) and maybe Saberhagen (94) before Viola (90). Frankie was a workhorse, and got to 20 wins, but he wasn't a dominating pitcher.

Willets Point wrote: The Ultimate Answer to the Great Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything.so long, willets... and thanks for all the fish.

does the streak include post-season games? If not, why not? as long as we're going to count a "streak" that has a 5-month hiatus, why should a post-season game not count? And Ripken's record is, by its nature, a multi-year record... a hitting streak is not.

Mark Healey wrote: Didn't David Hassellhoff star as Nick Fury? yes, in an awful made for tv movie. it could be Delta Force, it could be terrible. that's redundant.

I can't go. My friend has a pair for Saturday 1:10pm Upper Deck Box - front row, behind home. $27@.

you don't want me coaching 3rd... I will send everybody. Let me coach 1st. I'm less dangerous there.