Vic Sage

my original list of worries: a pitching rotation on the precipice of disaster; While Glavine pitched better than i expected, he's come back to Earth. Pedro started strong, too, but injuries have slowed him, as expected. I am entirely unhappy about a 3-4-5 of Trax, El Duque and a rookie to be named later (Bannister, Maine,Soler and Pelfrey, so far). So the rotation remains my biggest worry. an offense with holes at 2b and RF, health questions at 1b and LF, and a mystery man in cf; After Hernandez and Matsui bombed, Valentin has unexpectedly filled the the hole at 2b (for now). Nady has done pretty well, and Chavez has filled in nicely. The mystery man in CF has returned to form. The health question in LF turned out to be an appropriate concern, and, while Delgado has stayed relatively healthy, his slump has been a long one. a bullpen with an aging, big $ closer with a sore finger, and a setup guy who was a failed closer from Baltimore, who'll get way too many chances to blow way too many games; Wagner has NOT been lights out, but certainly better than we had, and it turns out it was Sanchez, not Julio given the setup job, and he's excelled. Julio was subsequently turned into El Duque, and has taken over as the closer for AZ. a small ball manager with no balls at all; despite his canonization, i'm still not a WWSB fan. a gm with an itchy trigger finger who hasn't demonstrated any particular ability to assess young talent, and I'll reserve judgement till i see what he does at the deadline to fix the rotation. a rich owner in the biggest media market in the world who requires strict adherence to a budget (eg, see Cameron and Benson trades), thus hamstringing efforts to fix the team in midstream. ditto.

The sporting news put together a 1st team and 2nd team based on first-half performances. They weren't just picking all-stars, though. They selected particular players for particular roles, as if they were constructing a team to compete. Mets selected: 1st team = Wright, Sanchez (and pitching coach rick petersen) 2nd team = Beltran & Pedro, + bench: Reyes and Chavez http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=sportingnewsmidseasonall&prov=tsn&type=lgns on edit: oh, and by the way, Jeter makes 1st team SS for his "winning ways". Makes you want to puke, doesn't it?

i think a guy whose idol is Cal Ripken may be inclined to stick with the team he started with. Especially since, as a kid growing up in Virginia, he was a fan of the Norfolk Tides.

the clip is from a long "concert film" which was basically Kevin Smith talking to a college audience for 3+ hours. It's actually pretty engaging, cuz Smith, while not exactly a "raconteur", is a pretty funny guy. i saw him speak once, in a talk he gave in Hoboken. He makes rambling into an artform, of sorts. Much like his movies, which have little cinematic quality, but are great for stylized conversations amongst interesting characters.

i have a pretty high sensitivity and low threshhold for the Garvey/Carter/Seaver/Clemens all-American too perfect BS jocks... a type discussed elsewhere with regard to Wright. Frankly, i don't get that vibe from him at all. He seems just a spunky, goofy down-home kid. He's good looking, but not in a "chiseled features" kind of way. More like a slightly scruffy surfer dude. Yeah, he's got a bit of frat boy in him, but he's not the one demanding the pledge bend over, but rather the nice guy who takes the sore-butted pledge out for a beer afterwards. I liked the story he told about his brothers. His younger brothers always call him, to either congratulate him for a good performance or razz him when he stinks. He said that, after the bare-handed catch he made last season against SD, they called and left a message saying it was a good thing he didn't try to catch it with his glove, or he would've dropped it (noting to Letterman that he made alot of errors last year). While he said nothing startling or contraversial, his answers didn't seem canned or rehearsed. He just seemed like a naturally decent guy you could hang out with, and if you drank too much, he'd drive you home.

]... in the years I have posted here and the old place I never thought there was any kind of clique... That's because we don't tell you about the meetings...

By the way, here's an earlier thread about PIRATE MOVIES: http://cybermessageboard.ehost.com/getalife/viewtopic.php?t=911

i had a 5 ***** rating that seems to have gotten lost in the poll posted above.... it was: > 5***** - Errol who? Amongst the best pirating pictures yet produced! Please write it in if your so inclined to give it that vote. Admins, can the poll be edited?

I didn't much care for the first one, beyond Depp's performance. But this one makes the first one seem like THE SEA HAWK. The movie ends without finishing the story, such as it is, thus rendering the entire film a setup for a 3rd chapter in this uninspired FX-laden series. This isn't friggin LORD OF THE RINGS. Waiting around for the 3rd chapter isn't going to keep me up nights. Though i did hear they're getting Keith Richards to play Depp's dad in the next one.

cuz she's every studio exec's MILF.

There is a movie coming out in September about George Reeves' suicide... HOLLYWOODLAND http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0427969/ "A uniquely compelling exploration of fame and identity. The drama, inspired by one of Hollywood's most infamous real-life mysteries, follows a 1950s private detective (Academy Award winner Adrien Brody) who, investigating the mysterious death of "Superman" star George Reeves (Academy Award winner Ben Affleck), uncovers unexpected connections to his own life as the case turns more personal. The torrid affair Reeves had with the wife (Academy Award nominee Diane Lane) of a studio executive (Academy Award nominee Bob Hoskins) might hold the key to the truth."

Speaking of Superman's dick, here is Larry Niven's classic essay on Kryptonian reproduction, "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

No credit. Cash only.

So in choosing not to re-sign Piazza and trading for LoDuca instead, we've given up 100 points of OPS (to date), not to mention some good prospects and substantially more money, and Paulie isn't even a defensive whiz? Jeez, whodda thunk?...besides me, i mean.

great read. he really finds the dramatic dimension of what is basically a sabrmetric discussion. Beane is a tragic hero who finds redemption by rejecting everything he was. A more ambivalent protagonist one is not likely to find this side of Hamlet.

McCloud's books (there was a followup that, while not as good, is still worth reading) are ESSENTIAL reading, not only to give one an aesthetic basis for appreciating sequential art, but for a philosophical discussion about the nature of art itself.

i was once in a league where i had a serious dispute with the administrator that turned personal. So i just dropped all the players on my team, basically creating a new draft for my dropped players.

This is the best live-action "superman" ever. The original SUPERMAN movie was in 3 acts... Act I on Krypton and Act II on the Kent farm were both successful at capturing the spirit and essence of the SM mythology. But then, after Superman leaves the Fortress of Solitude, his arrival in Metropolis marks an Act III notable mostly for its buffoonish silliness. Chris Reeve almost single-handedly lifts it above the cartoony milieu, with his dignified and humane portrayal, and the film ended strongly enough to overcome (for me) an overall sense of disappointment in the film. Still, i always felt SM 1 to be 2/3 of a great movie, betrayed by the inability of the filmmakers to take the story seriously once the hero became a guy who flew around in blue and red tights. SM 2 was more funny than silly, but still suffered the same problem... the failure to respect the source material or treat it with the dignity and seriousness that Reeve himself was able to inject into his performance. SM 3 and 4 are better forgotten. But SUPERMAN RETURNS achieves a majestic tone from the opening moments, and maintains it throughout. It trusts the audience to look at a man in red, yellow and blue tights and see not a childish clown but a spiritual figure of great profundity that has survived as an icon of our popular culture for over 65 years. Director Bryan Singer (as he did with X-MEN 1 & 2) understood that he was dealing with mythology, not just a "funny book" (as my father used to call them), and therefore gave it the weight it deserved. Some have criticized the movie for its length and pacing, but it is less a summer action/popcorn flick and more a stately epic. There is time taken to develop character, not just to push the narrative. There is space to let the characters breath, and for emotion to well up. Singer also delights in recreating certain visual tableaus, like Superman holding the car over his head in the pose evocative of the Cover of Action Comics #1, or his holding the Daily Planet globe on his back, depicting the myth of Atlas, which also forshadows the movie's climactic moment where he almost literally carries the world on his back. And of course, a tableau of crucifiction is recreated as well, reinforcing the interpretation of they myth as religious allegory. The film's visuals are a feast, and the action sequences are appropriately impressive. But its in its focus on character where this movie surpasses all prior live-action adaptations of the story. Brendan Routh communicates the sense of loss and emptiness that lives inside a being who is the last of his kind, whose father is a disembodied voice dead for thousands of years. He floats above the world, listening to the prayers for help from people he is isolated from but, unlike other gods before him, he chooses to answer our prayers. When trying to reconnect with Lois Lane, he takes her on a flight similar to the "can you read my mind" pas de duex from SM 1 (even incorporating the musical motif from that song into the underscoring), but instead of syrupy lyrics underlining Lois's schoolgirl-ish crush on the big blue hero, the scene is about a more mature love... about love AND responsibility. There is a real romantic chemistry between Routh and Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane who, despite her youth, convincingly conveys her conflict between professional ambition and maternal instinct, as well as her pain in loving the wrong man... loving the man who leaves more than the man who stays. And never, other than in the animated series, has Lex Luthor been so convincingly menacing. Despite his engaging twinkle, Spacey makes Lex a serious killer... an ex-con with a shiv, not a ludicrous super-villian. Even Parker Posey, as Luthor's "moll" has more than the usual depth for this type of supporting character. The movie is not perfect, by any means. Some of the plot points seem odd, at best, and nonsensical at worst. But the film's ability to capture the tone and spirit of Superman makes such problems seem like quibbles. Superman has, indeed, returned. Welcome back, big fella.

terrific animation, and good characterizations as well. solid pixar entertainment

Michael O'Donoghue seemed to pull it off without punchlines or humanity. I'm sure Silverman isn't in his universe but he was the meanest, darkest comic of all time. O'Donoghue was a satirist, a writer, a filmmaker, a sketch performer... but he was not a standup comic trying to relate to a live audience. And that is sort of my point about Silverman. She is, at times, a brilliant social satirist, a daring writer, and a pretty good performer, but as an artist she is closer to Karen Finley than she is to George Carlin, or Bill Hicks, or Pryor, or any of the other transgressive comics who are actually funny.

while i'm generally an advocate of a pitcher "challenging" a hitter, in Soler's case, discretion may have been the better part of valor. His stuff was so crappy that i cringed everytime he threw a strike. Of course, i cringed when he failed to throw strikes, too... which was often. So, really, i spent a whole lot of time cringing when he was on the mound.

David Wright - A Carlos Beltran - A Jose Reyes -- A- Carlos Delgado -- B+ Jose Valentin -- B Paul Lo Duca - B Xavier Nady - B Endy Chavez - B Julio Franco - B Ramon Castro - B Chris Woodward - C Lastings Millege - C Cliff Floyd - C- Eli Merrero - incomplete Tom Glavine - A- Pedro Martinez - A- Billy Wagner - A- Duaner Sanchez - B+ Chad Bradford - B El Duque - B Darren Oliver - B Pedro Feliciano - B- Aaron Heilman - C+ Steve Trachsel - C Heath Bell - C- Alay Soler - D JGonzalez - F Jose Lima - F Bannister - incomplete Maine - incomplete

yeah, my enthusiasm continues to be damper than a box of DEPENDS in a piss factory. and frankly i don't even know what that means...

bump

I'm worried enough that we're throwing a LHed pitcher, who hasn't been too great lately, in Fenway against a Red(hot) Sox lineup that I decided to bench Glavine on one of my fantasy teams. I'm thinking "sweep". And I'm still thinking what i thought before the season started... If Trachsel is your #3, you need an upgrade in your rotation. There was no way Glavine (or Pedro, for that matter) were going to continue pitching as well as they did in the first 1/3 of the season. They've both come back to earth, and the situation remains... we need another top-level SPer to be serious contenders this season.