Vic Sage

great, a walk and 2 hits. it was essential to leave Harvey in 1 inning too long.

it's just that, as a Met fan, i'm conditioned to think that every pitch Harvey throws brings him 1 pitch closer to some inevitable catastrophe, so we should minimize his pitch counts when at all possible.

I don't know about letting Harvey hit here; he has pitched enough today and probably won't go 9, so why not pinch-hit to try and blow it open. Except that Harvey is probably as likely to get a hit as any PHer we have, so never mind. on edit: or not.

ok Omah, hit that grannie!

THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME FOR A GRANNIE! (is there a bad time?)

i used to be a bit of an apologist for Costas. He is bright and articulate, and clearly loves the game, and so when he gets on his puritanical high horse, i usually think "well, somebody has to advocate for the game itself; nobody in baseball seems to do so." But this is a just a cheap shot, and niggardly in spirit. I used to think Bob was only small on the outside. By the way, i was at the Steve Henderson game, with my dad. My voice is still a little hoarse from screaming that night.

who gets ice cream in the first inning, except to beat the line...? I do. and i get more ice cream after i finish the first ice cream, and then later i get one for the road. People who complain about free ice cream should have the flesh flayed from their bones.

...the Mets have watched their three top hitting prospects -- Ike Davis, Ruben Tejada and Lucas Duda -- essentially fall off the face of the earth,... ok, Tejada is not one of top 3 hitting prospects and never was, and Duda hasn't fallen off the face of the earth. He's close to whatever reasonable projections might have been for him. Yes, Davis has been a disaster, but he was the first half of last year, too. That we talked ourselves into the fact that it was just a 1-time thing isn't Davis's fault... it's ours. And that we have no reasonable alternative for the position reflects on a lack of organizational depth, not some mystical force of doom which covers the franchise like a shroud.

Edgy MD wrote: Well, I think you're wavering between "they're not really re-building" and "they're rebuilding for the wrong reasons," but I think I stated clearly that circumstances have forced their hand. well you can think that, but its not what i said. I said it's a half-assed rebuild being forced on them by their economic problems... problems, by the way (contrary to Ceetar's assertion), that may have been exacerbated by losing but weren't caused by it. We could have played over .500 ball the last few seasons, even been competitive for post-season play, and the Madoff money problems would still have broken this team down, just as most observers anticipated.

But the Wright signing (as much as i liked it) is exactly why this is NOT a complete "blow up" situation, and a half-assed rebuild, in a typically Metsian fashion. If it was about rebuilding, they would have picked up David's 1-year option in the off-season, then traded him for the best package of prospects they could extract. Also the failure to sign Reyes was financial, not part of a rebuild. Again, we could have traded Reyes, as we did Beltran, as a rental since we apparently knew we weren't going to keep him, but we didn't and got nothing for him. so NOT a rebuilding move. Both the Reyes non-move and the Wright signing were more about saving face with the fans than baseball decisions, in my view. Trading Beltran, fragile and limited but still a potent bat, for a prospect was a matter of rebuilding but also of dumping salary, which was Sandy's number 1 priority. With Dickey, he was 38, looking for more years and $ than Sandy was willing to pay. So we got what we got for him. I don't believe that was motivated by a directive to rebuild but to keep payroll down. So yes, the Mets are rebuilding, by default not by design, as a consequence of cost-cutting. the drop in payroll is not evidence of a rebuild; the payroll cut is a CAUSE of the rebuild.

86-Dreamer wrote: Many seem to be writing off Satin based off very small major league sample size from last year. I see a prime age player that has consistently put up a 400/450/850 line at every level of the minors who could give the team similar production as Murphy from the right side. I hope they give him a real shot. this.

Ordonez is the comp? but not as good? And we paid over slot for him? Hey Sandy, the fucker can't hit... whaddya doin?

Satin, Edgin and Cowgill give you a reason to watch? Then you are truly desperate for a reason to watch.

These fuckers can hit. yeah, baby. oh, and fuck baby Mazz and the cornholin' daddy who conceived him.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Or maybe it's the fever, and maybe he's done. Done-done. I don't know what's wrong with Ike, but if I was guessing, I'd guess the fever. It comes. It goes. It's supposed to remain with a person for life, and at the level that Ike competes at, having just 5% of his energy sapped by the fever might mean the difference between starring in the major leagues and struggling for a spot on the bench. Nonsense. Swinging at bad pitches and taking good ones, and flailing around like a brain-damaged epileptic while doing so, has nothing to do with his "energy" or lack thereof. It has to do with mechanics and approach, which are currently for shit... and which may stay that way.

i didn't read that article yet, but yeah, Edgy has been on this issue since the old Mets forum days, and I've always agreed with him (believe it or not, there are a few issues on which we are aligned). A draft is one of those things, like capitalism for the rich and socialism for the poor (i.e., the collapse of our economy and ensuing bank bailout), that should be illegal. In the case of the draft, its wrong not only from an anti-trust perspective but based on, you know, the civil war amendments that prohibit people from being deemed property. Perish the thought that the owners have to actually compete for new players. How could they artificially depress salaries that way? As for our #1 pick, I've heard too many commentators compare Smith to Ike Davis, but i don't see it and i don't like it. Yeah, he's a LH 1b/of with power and a good arm, like Ike. But Ike's long swing makes him much more of a swing-and-miss guy. This kid apparently has "the hit tool", with a smooth, quick, pretty swing that makes consistent contact. He has some power, and it will likely increase as he ages and fills out (power usually does). But if he's a .300/20hr LHed 1Bman with GG-potential, the Mets comp isn't Davis... It's John Olerud. Without the helmet. And that would be just fiiiiiiiiine with me.

Thanks for that Zvon. very helpful. The one song you listed that didn't make my list that i really considered and now regret leaving off is REMEMBER (XMAS). SON OF SCHMILLSON was the only Nillson record i had as a teen, and i wore it out, and this was one of my faves. I think you underrate PUSSYCATS. His rough vocals imbue all the songs with an aching melancholy. The record is like an over-the-hill heavyweight getting in the ring one more time, relying more on his grit and guts than his degraded skills, and you are impressed by his will to win. COURTSHIP OF EDDIE'S FATHER and THE POINT, and the SON album, all combined to make Harry an important part of my adolescence. PUSSYCAT continued that into my college years (I bought it from a guy down the hall who was selling off all his records for pot money), and MIDNIGHT COWBOY, too. Later, listening to the original SCHMILLSON record and the NEWMAN covers maintained my affection for him, until POPEYE buried it for a good long while. But i rediscovered him when i showed THE POINT to my own son some years ago. Then there was a show on Broadway a few years ago called EVERYDAY RAPTURE, a 1-woman show with songs, and it featured a few of Harry's songs, which almost made me like the show... almost, but not quite. Anyway, it got me thinking about Harry again, and then i saw the documentary, which really brought it all back to me. You've given me some guidance on the rest of his output, and i'll try to check them out. Harry lives. Not like Elvis, but he lives.

Waddyaknow? A motherfucker that can hit good! good job sandy.

I'm rooting for any motherfucker who can hit good.

Vic Sage wrote: i love that idea. i had an eye on Blanks when he first was on his way up to SD, and had high hopes for him. He reminds me of Kevin Mitchell. still think so.

G-Fafif wrote: Sandy, like his buddy Fred, went to Lafayette. DOH! "Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" "Germans?" "Shut up, he's on a roll..." Lets change that line to "you went to Lincoln HS, like my brothers and Arthur Miller, you douchebag!"

is the misspelling of "meant" as "ment" (not to mention the misuse of commas) supposed to be ... ironic? Or just one more example of a culture in decline?

This was not at all unlikely; that's why so many of us predicted 85-95+ losses this season and didn't renew ticket plans. I do agree, however, that the offense is unlikely to stay THIS bad all year; no team is as bad as they look when they're losing or as good as they look when they're winning. Plus unproductive players will usually get dumped at some point. But we're getting approximately what we could have reasonably expected from 3b, 2b and LF; the C is around his lifetime numbers, with more power; CF and RF was slated to be manned by a collection of castoffs, marginal rooks and used up vets -- why should you have expected to get anything from such a menagerie? As for 1B, to date we're getting EXACTLY what we got at this point last season (maybe Ike turns it around again in the 2nd half, maybe he doesn't). SS is the only position where we've gotten significantly less than we could've reasonably expected, but as a #8 hitter with a 91 OPS+, our offense wasn't exactly built around Tejada's success or failure. But this analysis makes me either a pessimist or a lucky so-and-so.

Shoot `em all up with juice and play ball! Yee haw!

Ceetar wrote: If you expected the Mets offense to be this bad you were being overly pessimistic or just flat out guessing. Ha ha ha. you're funny. yes, this was totally unforseeable. And if you DID forsee it, you're a poopy pants. Your logic is positively Ceetardian.