Vic Sage

Here's the thread where we list our top 10 for the year. I don't get out to movies much anymore, except with my kids, but I'll start: My Top 10 Guardians of the Galaxy Birdman Into The Woods Grand Budapest Hotel Interstellar Lego Movie Dawn of the Planet of the Apes Snowpiercer 100 ft. Journey Under the Skin Honorable mentions: X-Men: Days of future past Hobbit Edge of Tomorrow Big Hero 6 How to Train Your Dragon 2 Lucy Cap America 2 Movies appearing on various top 10 lists that I'd like to see: Boyhood Whiplash Nightcrawler Gone Girl Top 5 Inherent Vice Babadook American Sniper Unbroken Only Lovers Left Alive Obvious Child Jodorowsky's Dune Selma Imitation Game Calvary

yes, i too finally caught up with this one and was glad of it. loved the structure of the storytelling, the design, the performances. The film is both unique and totally Andersonian. Even my wife liked this one, and she hates his films. I'm not sure how the young Indo-Asian lad grew up into F. Murray Abraham, but it's a small quibble.

Between the 2 of them, there's alot of teeth going on. their first kid might be a piranha.

i know Tulo is the best SS in baseball, but when i look at how many injuries he's had, and how many games he's missed, and how half of his great numbers were produced in Coors (not exactly CitiField), and how he's on the wrong side of 30 with a crippling (for the Mets) contract, i have to say no. And its not even about Syndergaard, really. I'm not yet convinced Thor is NOT going to be Mike Pelfrey (or Paul Wilson, or Tim Leary, or... ). But because i know its the kind of deal that, if it DOESN'T work out, will bury the team for years. Tulo is an "all in for this year" kind of move, and i don't think the Mets are there yet. By the time they are ready, it'll be even LESS likely that he'll be productive at CitiField.

if we just disagreed with your opinions, this would be a worthwhile discussion to have. But what people are trying to point out to you is that you contradict your own "facts" and opinions from one post to the next, so much so that it becomes an infuriating waste of time for all concerned. And now you've devolved into wound-licking victimization, which is the big neon indicator that further debate is fruitless. I'd say "enough already", but you'd just reply to this with another link in your illogical ceetardian chain of thought. So i'm done playing.

Edgy MD wrote: Better be a meaningful prospect. Montero's more than a throw-in. I don't like Crawford that much necessarily. Montero is AAA/ML ready; i was thinking of an equivalent but younger prospect still at A/AA. SF could put Montero at the back of their rotation immediately and let him develop there; we don't need to do that. We need a guy who can play SS well and whose offense still has upside, whose shown improvement every year, and is just now coming into his prime. We're not going to get that for 1-year rental of a solid but unspectacular 30-year old player who would asked to change positions... again. of course, since this is all a just a WATP, lets get him for Tejada!

forget it, Edge... it's Chinatown.

it brings to mind an old joke about a warehouse filled with canned sardines that is sold from one wholesaler to another, until finally a purchaser actually opens one of the cans and discovers that the sardines have gone bad. He complains to the seller who says "schmuck, these sardines are for buying & selling, not for eating."

i have no idea if they'd do it, and it may take another piece, even if they liked Murphy, because he's only under team control for 1 more year. Murphy and Montero for Crawford and a prospect?

Regarding 2b, if the Mets feel like either Flores or Hererra are ready to play 2b (or Matt Reynolds even), then Murphy is still available for trade. According to this http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/12/16/giants-look-likely-to-trade-for-pablo-sandovals-replacement/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs the Giants are looking to trade for a 3bman, and that is Murphy's best defensive position. Is SF a possible landing spot for Mr. Murphy? I'd take Brandon Crawford straight up for him. What about that kid they have, Matt Duffy? He was a SS in the minors and hit really well, with speed and a high OB%. They view him solely as a 2bman, though. Is his range that limited? Can he play SS in the majors? i'd take him if he can.

All-Prospect lineup: Nimmo CF Rosario SS Herrera 2b Conforto LF plawecki c Uhrena 3b Beccera RF D.Smith 1b

they include Cecchini over Uhrena; otherwise same top 10.

I've thought all along the Mets would go for a SS with the idea of having him be a LH hitting lead off guy, moving Flores to 2B, and trading Muffy. I sort of still think they do that. i still HOPE they do that. And i don't care which side of the plate he hits from, as long as he doesn't have much of a platoon differential, with at least a .330 OB%, and can run well enough to put himself in scoring position, and is hard to throw out going 1st-3rd or at the plate. And is a good defensive SS. And it would be nice if he had some power, but thats not a necessity. But who meets these criteria? Very few. In fact, the only leadoff-hitting SS in baseball over the past 3 seasons that approaches these criteria and is still active and able to bat leadoff is... ...a guy named Reyes. why don't we get THAT guy?

If he hits enough but can't play SS, then move him to 2b after Murphy leaves next year. If he can't hit or field well enough, then you move on. A big market team can afford the $30m to find out, but the Mets? Probably not.

SHOW US THE PLAN... AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

yeah, agreed about Colon. 1yr/$11m is not bad at all for his performance last year and what he is likely to do again this year. Sure, at age 41 he may just fall apart, but so might any pitcher at any moment. I have no problems with his contract, and i'm not sure why other teams in need of an innings (and buffet) eating #3-#4 starter aren't offering a prospect for him. Or maybe they are but Sandy's just waiting for the teams looking for a rental in July for the stretch run. I'm more confident in him than i am in Gee.

I had written yet another "rant", but i just deleted it because what's the point. "Bah, bah, bah".

Vic Sage wrote: "bah, bah, bah"

"bah, bah, bah"

We don't deserve a super high payroll just because we're arrogant New Yorkers yes, you're right. we don't deserve a super high payroll just because we're arrogant New Yorkers, we deserve it because NY is the BIGGEST SPORTS MARKET ON THE FUCKING PLANET. NY teams get more media money, more merch money, more ticket, parking, concession money, more licensing money, more ad money THAN ANY OTHER SPORTS MARKET ON THE FUCKING PLANET. The Mets own a regional sports network. they have a sweetheart deal with the city for their stadium. They are the national league descendants of both GIANTS and DODGERS fans, giving them 2 fanbases to draw on initially, which made their peak attendance greater than the Yankees in their peak years. Whether they are currently winning or not should not preclude an appropriately financed operation in this market from having a competitive payroll, equivalent to Boston, Philly, LA, Chicago, SF, Toronto, St.L,... or even smaller market teams like Arizona, Cinncinatti, Milwaukee... MILWAUKEE, FER CHRISSAKES! I'm not asking them to spend what the Yankees spend... the MFYs are a international brand borne of their many championships; they are able to monetize that like nobody else. But what about the Dodgers, the Sox, the Phillies, the Giants? Current winning/losing trends and profits have only a tangential relationship to a franchise's overall value, and its the value that should drive payroll, not last year's P/L statement. How much of the value of the team should owners be willing to spend each season? That's a question nobody asks. And why? We're the ones that create that value. Don't even arrogant NYers, paying the highest prices for everything connected to a baseball game, have a right to expect that the value we create (not the PROFIT, the VALUE) be reinvested in the team we root for? Why is this basic fact so completely lost on you? You overlook our inability to pursue big contract players (either in trade or FA), and deem it a good business strategy. Our underfunded ownership has us locked into a cycle of perpetual mediocrity (at best), and you treat it like its a fact as uncontrollable as the weather, rather the result of their conscious decision making. Why is this even a controversial point? This is the reality. The only open question is how do we as fans respond to that fact? Peaceful protest? Civil disobedience? Armed Insurrection? Numb obeisance? These are the same choices any population faces when confronted by endless abuse by its ruling class. You want to go "bah bah bah" all the way home? great. Me? I'm sick of this shit. I don't know what I'll do about it, but i have consciously chosen to attend fewer games every year. And when that nice group sales lady called me at my office to pitch CitiField for our corporate events, i explained to her that she should call me back when Freddie and Jeffie sell the team. will it do any good? fuck no. but it makes me feel better. Its like voting for 3rd party candidates. I've never regretted voting for Nader, because he's the only one who represented my values. I'm not going to support pricks just because i'm not given a choice. And i'm not going to go gently into that good night without some raging against the dying of the light. on edit: and D'Kong, you can use my name whenever you like, my brother. We've been thru the wars together. But these kids today...

i said they were active, i didn't say they were smart.

our billionaires aren't rich enough.

if filling mutual needs was all it took, Starlin Castro might be a Met today. But there is a question of value, or perceived value, that may have kept that deal from happening, and would keep this one from happening, too. If you had a potentially great SS in the high minors (ranked by some as the #1 prospect), and I had a potentially great pitcher (ranked by no one as the #1 prospect, but by many as in the top 10), would you trade your SS to me? I sure hope you would, cuz i'd drive the pitcher to the airport. It doesn't matter who else Texas has on its roster, they would not move such a player for less than what they perceive his value to be vis-a-vis another player's value. That's the kind of thing that gets a GM fired. But the reason they MIGHT move him now is because of the uncertainty and risk involved due to the SS's recent injuries. His value is now diminished to the point where such a deal might make sense to them. But why on earth would they agree to a deal that only gets them our pitcher if their SS is demonstrably healthy? Then, we're back to square one.

their finances aren't "theoretical"... they're actual, and have actual impact on my team's ability to win. And if you don't see that, then you're ceetarded. and again, FK, it's not "sptting in the wind". It's spitting on their Benz. And slashing their tires. Maybe sugar in the gas tank. It won't stop them from fixing the car back up and driving it home to their north shore mansion, but they may have to think about where they park it next time.

if Profar' demonstrates that he's healthy and productive, then they won't WANT to trade him, so why would they do this? It seems to me that the opportunity is only here BECAUSE of the risks involved.