Vic Sage

well, if we're going up to adulthood, I had food poisoning in the middle of AMERICAN PRESIDENT. I doubt that theater bathroom was ever the same afterwards.

Edgy MD wrote: I don't see where it makes much difference which teams are hoping to get him on the cheap, if that's in fact what's going on, which is pretty much a point of speculation at this juncture, so you may have been prematurely galled. there is no difference; it is simply ironic and points out the role reversal our team may be involved in thanks to changing fortunes of the Wilpons. As for my premature galling, i'm taking medication for that. at any rate, i said the notion was galling, speculative or not... and it is. Whether the Mets actually behave this way obviously remains to be seen, and there will be plenty more gall to go around at that point, should it occur.

i was visiting a friend in Berkeley sometime in the mid-1980s, and while i was out there, i went to Candlestick to see the Mets play the Giants one night. It was August. People were in parkas; at one point, the fog rolled in and you couldn't see ground balls... foghorns were sounding in the stadium and folks were laughing and enjoying themselves. I remember thinking 2 things: this isn't baseball, and what is wrong with these people? i don't remember the game at all, just the damp cold penetrating my very being.

whatever value we may or may not ascribe to Drew, the notion that the $3.8m (edit: $3.2m; $600K guaranteed) the Mets would save by releasing Ike would be necessary in order to make that acquisition, is truly galling. When Milwaukee and Pitt are the "rich teams" looking to exploit our poverty-stricken franchise by waiting for us to give up on $4m players because they're too "expensive", we're looking at systemic problems.

why on earth would they just release him? It's not like production by Duda and Satin have made Ike irrelevant... those guys haven't produced much either, and neither has shown the ability to date to hit 32 HRs and drive in 90r in the majors. And its not like we'd lose Duda if we just sent him down; he has options. I don't know what the baseball rationale is for a move like this. It seems to me that cutting Ike for nothing to anoint Duda and save $3m would be an indicator of a larger systemic problem.

Morales is 30, with an average OPS+ of 120, with a .280/30hr/90rbi line. And you don't think he is an obvious choice to outperform Ike or Lucas? Yeah, i'll just say i strenuously disagree. While the race doesn't always go to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, that's the way to bet. as to his cost, we don't have to trade for him. As i understand it, the Mets won't have to give up a top pick (it's protected, yes?), so the cost here is money. Same for Drew. Which is why neither will happen; Sandy has likely maxed out his card. But lets not pretend either move wouldn't be an obvious and immediate upgrade on the field or in any way cripple the ability of a big market team to move forward.

the implication seems to be that the effect is relatively small and outweighed by other factors unless you totally rebuild your lineup to amplify the effect. So I don't think signing 1 or 2 guys either indicates a change in our team's philosophy or a basis for the team's improvement next year. But I would like to think it does show Sandy's effort to gain every possible advantage for our "small market" team.

1) CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG - i was a little freaked out at the end, where the child catcher was snatching up kids with a big net, but otherwise liked it alot. i always had a soft spot for dick van dyke. 2) my only bad memory of childhood movie-theater attending was actually when i was 13 (the summer of 74; i had just finished 7th grade) I went to a movie without my parents for the first time, going with some friends to the theater in Kings Plaza. My dad drove us to the mall, then killed time til our movie was over, so we could have the experience of "going ourselves" without, you know, actually having to go ourselves. so anyway, it was PG, and we were allowed to go without parental supervision, but I was 13 so had to pay adult price (which was cool!). But when we got inside, the usher made us sit in a special "kid's section" for unsupervised kids. i WAS OUTRAGED! If they were going to charge me full price, i was damn well going to sit wherever i wanted. i told the usher the only way i'd sit there is if i had purchased a child-price ticket. There was a bit of yelling and threatening and the manager threw me out. I sat in front of the movie theater until it was over and my dad came back to drive us home. I told him what had happened, thinking 'these guys are going to get it now!" but he didn't do anything. I think he said something about the theater needing to keep an eye on kids in their theater or something. i was devastated. Even though i had just turned 13, I had not had a Bar Mitzvah (our family didn't go in for that sort of thing), but that day i became a man... or at least suffered a loss of innocence generally associated with manhood. I don't remember the movie; it may have been MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. I remember seeing it on TV years later and thinking "god, what a piece of crap...i'm glad they didn't let me see this!"

MFS62 wrote: Where do I nominate Lynn Henning for the writers' wing of the HOF for coming right out and saying that he feels that a (mostly) DH does not belong in the HOF? I wonder if Frank Thomas is on his ballot? Later how about AL pitchers? Are they undeserving of a HoF vote, too? They don't hit, you know, so they're only half a ballplayer, and like their NL counterparts, starting pitchers only play 1 out of 5 games. And relief pitchers should absolutely not be eligible, right? they only pitch what, 60 innings a year, and hardly ever hit. Bah. Fie on them! You've made this point about the undeserving DH before and guess what... it's still bullshit. And any writer arbitrarily deciding that certain positions that baseball players currently play are unworthy of a HoF vote, no matter how good the player is at it, shouldn't get extra credit for that decision; they should just turn their balloting rights over to somebody who isn't an asshole.

The MFYs add Brian Roberts and Matt Thornton... and they just keep getting older and more expensive: CF - Ellsbury (30/$22m) SS - Jeter (40/$12m) / Ryan (32/$2m) RF - Beltran (37/$15m) / Ichiro (40/$6.5m) 1b - Texiera (34/$22.5m) 3b -[A-Rod (38/$25m) - may be suspended]/ Nunez (27/?) C - McCann (30/$17m) / Cervelli (28/~$1m) DH - Soriano (38/$5m) / Wells (35/$2.4m) LF - Gardner (32/~$4m) 2b - Roberts (36/$2m) / Johnson (32/$3m) SP - Sabathia (33/$22m) SP - Kuroda (39/$16M) SP - Nova (27/~$3m) SP - [Pineda] (25/~$?) SP - [Phelps] (27/~?) RP - Robertson (29/~$3m) RP - Kelley (30/~$2m) RP - Eppley (28/~?) RP - Thornton (37/$3.5m) RP - Warren (26/~?) / Claiborne (26/~?) RP/SP -[Huff] (29/~?)

holy shit. i'm old.

they re-released LAWRENCE in theaters about 10-15 years ago (i think), when it was digitally remastered for a deluxe DVD set. I had never seen it on screen (having only seen it on TV before that), and so I saw it at the Ziegfeld, in NYC, which is a huge, first-rate movie palace of the old style. It was as close as i get to a religious experience.

so with 37 guys on the 40-man roster (including Harvey, who'll be on the 60-day IR and so i think can be taken off the 40 for next season), what is Sandy looking for to fill out the roster? Or does he leave spots open for in-season moves? I think he'd like to sign one more vet SPer and one more vet reliever, and probably a SS if he can find one better than Tejada.

i think the post-apocalyptic ending is a hoot and a half; as if to say we'd just as soon pull this world down around our ears than conform to your middle-class notions of propriety. We have the right to be assholes even if it means the world's end. And they prove this point at every football match over there, so it seems a deeply held cultural value worth commenting on.

PETER O�TOOLE: A SELECTED FILMOGRAPHY Over the course of seven decades, Peter O�Toole played a range of desiccated kings, glorious emperors, power-mad generals, besotted aristocrats, and delightfully daft artists, philosophers and scientists� with the genius to show us the humanity in them all. He was so much larger than life that the screen could barely contain him. Yet he came from modest circumstances that he never forgot, infusing even his maddest of kings with the lowest of human foibles, evoking sympathy even when none should have been possible. Peter Seamus O�Toole was born Irish and raised English, with a bookie for a dad and a brutal catholic school education. He followed his years in the navy with training at RADA (with classmates Albert Finney, Alan Bates and Richard Harris), then spent his early professional years (the 1950s) on the stage of the Old Vic, and doing inconsequential TV and low-budget films in the UK. Then, when Albert Finney turned down a part over contractual demands, the dashing young O�Toole was cast instead... as T.H. Lawrence. And the rest, as they say, was history. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA became one of the biggest hits (and best movies) of all time and launched O�Toole into international superstardom. With his striking features, piercing blue eyes, Nordic blonde hair, and a smooth articulate cadence, he filled out the next decade with memorable films which forged his heroic screen persona. * Lawrence of Arabia (1962) � At 4 hours, it still isn�t long enough; an absolutely breathtaking masterpiece by David Lean and O�Toole stands astride it like a colossus * Becket (1964) � O�Toole�s high-spirited but regal King Henry II outshines friend Richard Burton as Becket in a still brilliant adaptation of the Anouilh play Lord Jim (1965) � Adaptation of the Conrad novel about the redemption of a coward is not quite there, but it still worth seeing for O�Toole and co-star James Mason What's New, Pussycat (1965) � Swinging 60s sex comedy co-starring Peter Sellers (with a script by Woody Allen) allowed O�Toole a change of pace, but it�s unwatchably dated How to Steal a Million (1966) � A charming romantic comedy caper with Audrey Hepburn; have not seen it in ages and so have no idea how dated it may feel, but I remember it fondly The Night of the Generals (1967) � WWII-era murder mystery; O�Toole as a mad Nazi general offers his first (of very few) performances as an unabashed screen villain * The Lion in Winter (1968) - Nominated again for playing Henry II (as he was in Becket), this time opposite Kate Hepburn; it�s a wordy, stagey film adaptation of a great play, but still enjoyably black fun, well worth seeing for O�Toole and Hepburn and their sizzling repartee (�oh god, but I do love being king!�) * Goodbye, Mr. Chips (1969) - O�Toole in an unexpected role as a repressed school teacher, and Petula Clark as the music hall performer he falls for, in this unnecessarily musicalized and dated remake. Murphy's War (1971) � not too bad WWII action/drama, with O�Toole obsessed with revenge against the U-Boat that sunk his ship * The Ruling Class (1972) � A mad aristocrat becomes Jesus who becomes Jack the Ripper in this surreal black comedy satirizing the British class system and conformity; over the top and not to everyone�s taste, but I love this one Man of La Mancha (1972) � A critical and commercial disaster, with O�Toole�s songs all dubbed, this adaptation of the Broadway musical is still a sentimental favorite of mine, and I say this without arguing for its quality O�Toole�s career was derailed in the 1970s due to his alcoholism and stomach cancer, leaving not much of note from that period. Zulu Dawn (1979) � solid action epic about a South African war, with O�Toole in a supporting role as an arrogant British lord and commander. Caligula (1979) � Penthouse's soft-core porn version of Roman history; O�Toole plays his �mad king�-type signature role, here intended to class up a classless enterprise Beginning in the 1980s, after giving up alcohol and undergoing extensive medical treatment, O�Toole reemerged with two of his best films, then appeared regularly thereafter in supporting roles in Hollywood films through the 80s and 90s. He also did a number of European features and some TV work during this period, as well. * The Stunt Man (1980) - O�Toole as an omnipotent film director; this comedic contemplation on the nature of reality is one of my all-time faves Masada (1981, TV miniseries) � O�Toole was Emmy-nominated as a Roman general in this celebrated mini-series * My Favorite Year (1982) � Comedy about early days of TV, with O�Toole as a drunken aging ex-movie star; his physical comedy and droll wit are drenched in poignancy. Another all-time fave Creator (1985) � Genial comedy with O�Toole as an old professor trying to clone his dead wife; sweet, if not memorable Club Paradise (1986) � O'Toole is here as governor of a Caribbean island, adding a bit of style to a crappy Ramis comedy with Robin Williams The Last Emperor (1987) - A small role in a big film, O�Toole resonates as the British advisor to the emperor High Spirits (1988) � This comic fantasy features O�Toole as the lord of a haunted castle; the film is ruined by the presence of Steve Guttenberg (which is true of every film he was ever in) King Ralph (1991) � O�Toole is an aristocrat advising John Goodman, a bumbling American, on how to be a king, in this otherwise pedestrian goofball comedy Gulliver's Travels (1996, TV Movie) � O�Toole is the emperor of Lilliput in this mediocre Hallmark mini-series (still, it was better than the Jack Black version) FairyTale: A True Story (1997) � As Arthur Conan Doyle, O�Toole plays a supporting role in this whimsical, lovely film about 2 girls who photograph fairies in WWI England Joan of Arc (1999, TV miniseries) � Won an Emmy for his supporting role as Bishop Cauchon; * O�Toole had been nominated 7 times for an Academy Award as Best Actor, but never won. In 2003, he was given a special and overdue Oscar for his lifetime of work, but he was not done yet. He ended his career strongly, with some solid supporting roles in good films over the next few years. He would even get one more nomination for Best Actor in VENUS, for a total of 8 nominations without winning, which may still be the record. Hitler: The Rise of Evil (2003, TV movie) � Another Emmy nomination, this time for his role as the German president. Troy (2004) � Wolfgang Peterson�s terrific adaptation of Homer�s epic offers O�Toole his penultimate �old king� role, this time Priam of Troy, and he does it justice, with his usual steel * Venus (2006) � His last Oscar nom came for this acclaimed little indie; O�Toole is an old actor playing an old actor, this time in love with a very young woman. Bittersweet, funny, but kind of creepy, and slow as molasses in January. Stardust (2997) � O�Toole in a small part, and his last �King� role, in a criminally underrated fantasy adventure based on a Neil Gaiman graphic novel The Tudors (2008, TV Series) � O�Toole�s last significant role, as Pope Paul III, in this justifiably acclaimed Showtime series He would do some more TV and film work over his last years (some projects still waiting for release) before announcing his retirement in July of 2012. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Seamus O'Toole (8/2/31 Galway, Ireland - 12/14/13 London, England) �Good-night, sweet prince; and flights of angels sing thee to thy rest. � - WS �The only exercise I take is walking behind the coffins of friends who took exercise.� � PO So long, my liege, and thanks for all the fish. TOP 12: Lawrence of Arabia (1962) Becket (1964) The Lion in Winter(1968) The Stunt Man (1980) My Favorite Year (1982) The Ruling Class (1972) ----------------------------- Lord Jim (1965) Venus (2006) Masada (1981, TV miniseries) Creator (1985) The Night of the Generals (1967) Goodbye, Mr. Chips (1969)

I love the Simon Pegg "oeuvre". This is a funny satire, with some great performances.

Mex17 wrote: I think that den Dekker and Lagares would make the 25-man ahead of Duda and Brown if the season started today why? the value of Lagares and dDekker is the same... defensive CFer, without much of a bat. But Granderson and Young are going to play everyday, and EY most days, and they can all play CF (to a greater or lesser degree), so the Mets are better served having guys on the bench who can give you some pop as late-inning PHers from either side. Plus, Lagares and dDekker have options; Brown doesn't, and he's played some CF too As for Duda, he'll probably end up at 1B with Ike being moved, so that will make room for a LHed bat for the bench, but neither Lagares and dDekker can give you that. I think there is no way dDekker makes the opening day roster and the only way Lagares does is if Murphy is traded and they think EY can play 2b everyday, or if they decide EY is just a utility player and start Lagares in CF.

Relax folks; it's 2 years, not 10. It's $10m/yr, not $24m. A contract like this really shouldn't prevent a NYC franchise with a new park and its own network from doing whatever else it needs to do to improve itself, so i'm not sure why it's scary (i know why; that's rhetorical). Colon has had a pretty good career and is coming off an all-star season. He didn't cost us anything but money. Sure, he's fat, he's old, has a history of PEDs... and could blow up tomorrow, but so could Wheeler (see Harvey, Matt). If that happens, you move on. Or rather a competently managed franchise moves on. Do i think Colon makes us a pennant contender in 2014? Uh, no. No i don't; not without Harvey, some better BP arms, a SS, and fewer dead spots in the lineup. But with him and Granderson, and maybe some progress from youngsters Wheeler, D'Arnaud and Lagares, we can win at least as many as we lose, making the watching of games next year a better bet.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I think we gotta distinguish which shortstop you swap Davis for. i've done enough of Sandy's job for one day... now its time for a mai tai.

sign Kendrys morales, trade Davis for a SS or SPer, send Duda to AAA. done. next.

that Norrin Radd was sure wrong. Criswell my ass!

WAR the last SIX years: Kemp 3.9 4.8 -1.1 8.1 2.4 0.5 --- 17.6 Ethier 2.2 2.9 1.9 2.4 3.8 2.7 --- 15.9 WAR the last FIVE years: Kemp 4.8 -1.1 8.1 2.4 0.5 --- 13.7 Ethier 2.9 1.9 2.4 3.8 2.7 --- 13.7 WAR the last THREE years: Kemp 8.1 2.4 0.5 --- 11.0 Ethier 2.4 3.8 2.7 --- 8.9

I said "a positive overall contribution to the lineup", not to the OF defense. As flawed as he is, Young is a better offensive player than Lagares, and good enough defensively to play over him.

Also, Kemp is more erratic; he can be great or awful (with annual WARs going from -1 to over 8). Ethier is more consistent (WARs in the 2-3 range, peaking at 3.8). But Ethier has a high platoon differential, so he is neutralized by lefties. i say go for the gusto. no pain, no gain. give me a shot at an MVP candidate.

Again, depends what numbers you look at. And i'm not arguing for Young, per se. But saying his line is the same as Tejada's as a way of dismissing him when, (1) you've argued FOR Tejada in the past, based on that same line, and (2) the similarity in their batting somehow excludes Young's 40+ SB differential, is the kind of agenda-based cherry-picking that tends to discredit your argument.