duan

try 3,000!

santos is a good part to have, he hasn't embarrassed himself with the bat and is possibly going to be a decent defensive backstop, but let's not think that he's a late blooming pudge roderiguez. cause he aint. But serviceable part for Major League Minimum is not to be sneezed at.

have you ever had to go to court? why should the burden of proof belong to me, not the person who says things about me. [for the record, i'm only talking this out, not necessarily advocating!]

but why is the right to my good name "odd"

In Ireland & UK (where much of our law stems from anyway) if you publish something, the burden is on you to be able to prove that it's true, not the other way round. It's a very different dynamic.

I've never understood the US's attitude to Libel. An attitude that's become more pervasive worldwide as the values held by US companies become imposed elsewhere through the internet (not through any fault of the US' - why should the New York Times have to worry about Irish libel laws really). The right to say whatever you like about someone seems to be wrapped up in a Freedom of Speech banner and I don't know that that's actually fair.

no matter whom they or their family play for I feel nothing but sorry for someone who gets entangled in that kind of thing. She's obviously dealing to feed a habit and the last thing she needs is to be picked up by the wire services. Joba's quote is refreshingly nice.

[url:2si8vtww]http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/standings.php[/url:2si8vtww] ok so here's the deal, our runs scored/against totals would lead you to believe our record should be 10.4 wins 10.6 losses. .500 basically but essentially only one game out from where we are. However, if you look at the actual production of our hitters and pitchers, EQR and EQRA you see that we 'should' have a run differential that's a substantially more positive. That's probably being caused by one of three things or more likely a little of all of them - luck, bad defense (on our part) and bad in game management.

nah, he's a 3rd baseman by trade. I think they won't put him at first because "we don't want him to have too many things to think about" etc etc etc.

sorry I should point out I'm not actually disagreeing, more mocking schneider. Who, frankly is worse then useless, this season it being him rather then any old league average hitter has cost us .533 runs per game, this season it being him rather then any old league average catcher has cost us .464 runs a game. And I know it's a small sample size, and I know his back and calf are hurting him. He's just a terrible offensive player.

="Edgy DC":vwalgcck] Or was Castro incapacitated or something?[/quote:vwalgcck] is he ever not? LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 29 2009 09:29 AM ="batmagadanleadoff"]Perhaps I've already forgotten, but I don't recall Jerry bunting this season to the point where it's a nuisance. Schneider has already been called upon to sac bunt twice. So have Super-Hot Slappy Castillo and Ryan F-ing Church. Oh, and welcome Abordick, Ceetar. How do you REALLY feel about Jerry Manuel? Frayed Knot Apr 29 2009 09:31 AM Re: A disaster ="Ceetar":3kc4se6w]I think Manuel's been a disaster. I wasn't unhappy with Willie myself, but when it seemed likely a change is what this team needed, I wish they had done it. Instead they stuck with a familiar guy, a guy who'd been with the team for the collapses, as well as supposedly being the guy who was pushing for the 9th inning decisions in game 7 in '06. To me he's a guy who never trusts his players, to a point that he actively doesn't trust them and instills no confidence in them. I think they should've brought in someone from outside the team, with a fresh perspective, and had him work with Wright and Reyes to lead the team that way. Instead, Manuel has been second guessing Reyes and Wright since he got here. The big thing is his over use of the bullpen and how matchup happy he is, to a fault. I also have issues with how un-aggressive this team seems on the bases. Whether it's the lack of stolen bases, or not going first to third. I've heard Manuel say that he's told Reyes to pick his spots more. In previous years, _every_ body was bouncing around the bases, threatening to steal, taking big leads, distracting the pitcher so that it was rare that a pitcher was on the mound without at least some distraction with a guy on base. Even pitchers were doing it! Remember how we ran all over Chris Carpenter impressive streak of not allowing a lot of stolen bases, and how he hasn't been the same since? It's never too early to fire Manuel.[/quote:3kc4se6w] Welcome Ceetar, nice virgin post. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but you state your case well and I like your avatar. duan Apr 29 2009 09:38 AM sorry I should point out I'm not actually disagreeing, more mocking schneider. Who, frankly is worse then useless, this season it being him rather then any old league average hitter has cost us .533 runs per game, this season it being him rather then any old league average catcher has cost us .464 runs a game. And I know it's a small sample size, and I know his back and calf are hurting him. He's just a terrible offensive player. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 29 2009 09:41 AM ="Ceetar":2ojhbd60]Remember how we ran all over Chris Carpenter impressive streak of not allowing a lot of stolen bases, and how he hasn't been the same since?[/quote:2ojhbd60] Although the thought that Reyes makes him wake up in night sweats is a pleasant one, his "not being the same since" might have something to do with, you know, the shoulder and elbow injuries. Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 09:45 AM What's MM's right hand doing here? Ceetar Apr 29 2009 09:54 AM ="Edgy DC":250omu6m] What's MM's right hand doing here?[/quote:250omu6m] Icon inspired by this Kurt Snibbe post and the lion's new 'fiercer' logo: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=snibbe/090421&sportCat=nfl Yeah, Carpenter probably isn't waking up with nightmares about Reyes, but my point is that the Mets used to run the bases in a way that gave pitchers nightmares, and they don't anymore. batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 09:59 AM ="Ceetar"]... my point is that the Mets used to run the bases in a way that gave pitchers nightmares, and they don't anymore. Actually, the way the Mets used to run the bases under Willie gave me a nightmare. It seemed as if that team couldn't go one week without having one of their own thrown out at the plate by four or five footsteps. RealityChuck Apr 29 2009 10:09 AM ="Edgy DC":1qfj9mu7]And it's also an option to pinch-hit a righty there, isn't it? Or was Castro incapacitated or something?[/quote:1qfj9mu7] Basic baseball strategy 101 (as indicated by Earl Weaver*, who knew a thing or two): avoid using your last catcher as a pinch hitter. If the catcher gets injured (and catchers are more likely than other positions), you're screwed. *Weaver pointed out how important Elrod Hendricks was to the team, despite his poor offensive stats, since he allowed Weaver to switch catchers and still have Hendricks on the bench in case of injury. Rotblatt Apr 29 2009 10:10 AM ]Lifting a starter after six with 100 or so pitches and a five-run lead just fries my butt. Totally. He's been too quick to yank starting pitchers (up to and including Johann), and while, yes, our bullpen is better this year, if we overwork our relievers, it won't stay that way. I'm not a fan of the bunting either, but I feel like he's been better than Willie on that front, and leaving his decision to stick with Green last night aside, his bullpen management has been better as well. So I'm going to go with, he's an improvement, but he could be better. metirish Apr 29 2009 10:20 AM With the way this new park looks like it's going to play , a lot of doubles and triples , it would seem to suit smart aggressive play . I would like to see Beltran and Reyes play with more abandon . Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 10:21 AM ="RealityChuck":3pp7aa9r]="Edgy DC":3pp7aa9r]And it's also an option to pinch-hit a righty there, isn't it? Or was Castro incapacitated or something?[/quote:3pp7aa9r] Basic baseball strategy 101 (as indicated by Earl Weaver*, who knew a thing or two): avoid using your last catcher as a pinch hitter. If the catcher gets injured (and catchers are more likely than other positions), you're screwed. *Weaver pointed out how important Elrod Hendricks was to the team, despite his poor offensive stats, since he allowed Weaver to switch catchers and still have Hendricks on the bench in case of injury.[/quote:3pp7aa9r] I don't know if it's 101, but Bobby Valentine sure ignored it left and right. Earl Weave spent his career in the American League, and once 1973 came around, this issue was only theoretical to him, and so he never had to weight it against other values. He certainly didn't manage in an era of 12- and 13-man pitching staves, when nobody could afford to carry a third catcher. It's a valid value, but changing times and circumstances from Weaver's force it to be weighed fairly against other values. Ceetar Apr 29 2009 10:32 AM ="Edgy DC":27hreoq1]="RealityChuck":27hreoq1]="Edgy DC":27hreoq1]And it's also an option to pinch-hit a righty there, isn't it? Or was Castro incapacitated or something?[/quote:27hreoq1] Basic baseball strategy 101 (as indicated by Earl Weaver*, who knew a thing or two): avoid using your last catcher as a pinch hitter. If the catcher gets injured (and catchers are more likely than other positions), you're screwed. *Weaver pointed out how important Elrod Hendricks was to the team, despite his poor offensive stats, since he allowed Weaver to switch catchers and still have Hendricks on the bench in case of injury.[/quote:27hreoq1] I don't know if it's 101, but Bobby Valentine sure ignored it left and right. Earl Weave spent his career in the American League, and once 1973 came around, this issue was only theoretical to him, and so he never had to weight it against other values. He certainly didn't manage in an era of 12- and 13-man pitching staves, when nobody could afford to carry a third catcher. It's a valid value, but changing times and circumstances from Weaver's force it to be weighed fairly against other values.[/quote:27hreoq1] Last year, even when we had three catchers, both Willie and Manuel still seemed reluctant to use one. To me, It's a low-risk situation. Sure, it's possible your catcher gets hurt and you have to make someone else squat behind there. But to me, that's managing scared, managing not to lose. Try to win, and if that's using Castro off the bench, do it. metirish Apr 29 2009 10:38 AM We used to have Joe McEwing as the emergency catcher and IIRC Woodward more recently. Who on this team would serve in that role? Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 10:49 AM Santana, of course. batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 10:52 AM I'd like to see Johan catch his own pitches. Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 11:12 AM I want to see the 27-man roster and the abolition of the DH. Those two extra players would return us to the number of position players that were on rosters before pitching staffs increased in size from ten to twelve. Among other things, teams would be able to carry a third catcher. Frayed Knot Apr 29 2009 11:55 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":1wn2ynbr]I want to see the 27-man roster and the abolition of the DH. Those two extra players would return us to the number of position players that were on rosters before pitching staffs increased in size from ten to twelve. Among other things, teams would be able to carry a third catcher.[/quote:1wn2ynbr] No, it would allow managers to carry that 14th or 15th pitcher -- and LaRussa would use them all in certain games. Ashie62 Apr 29 2009 02:10 PM I want to see the aboltion of Jerry Manuel HahnSolo Apr 29 2009 02:26 PM Jerry certainly opened himself up to questions today, no doubt. mario25 Apr 29 2009 02:27 PM Hitting Santos for Castro today was absolutely dumb..... metirish Apr 29 2009 02:28 PM Howie on the radio was great during this move...." Jerry will probably say he's playing a hunch".... Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 02:31 PM There shouldn't even have been a bottom of the ninth. Frayed Knot Apr 29 2009 02:32 PM Probably banking on Santos being faster and less of a chance at a K. Ashie62 Apr 29 2009 02:32 PM Post game conference should be a hoot Somewhere, Castro is secretly happy Ceetar Apr 29 2009 02:44 PM Managing Scared Fire him before it�s too late. Send away the pitching and hitting coach while you're at it. If you're really desperate to keep HoJo with the organization, make him the new bench coach. Why give away 4 outs? Why pinch hit a guy that�s hot for a guy that wasn�t watching the game and hasn�t been watching what Lindstrom was throwing. We all know this team needs confidence. so what kind of confidence does it show Castro in that spot? Murphy that he�s replaced defensively and would�ve been up in the ninth? Reyes when you won�t let him steal early in the count or only hit and run and tell him when to go? Or that you're constantly bunting in front of him like he can't drive the guys in himself. Drawing the infield in in the first. Managing scared. Manuel set the stage from the very beginning saying �Even though it�s the first inning, I don�t think you guys are going to score enough runs to win if we let this run score.� Well, ask and you shall receive. Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 02:46 PM I can only imagine what the Pessimistic Mets Fan is saying. Ceetar Apr 29 2009 02:51 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":1qalul5w]I can only imagine what the Pessimistic Mets Fan is saying.[/quote:1qalul5w] Sadly, I think the pessimistic part is redundant for too many. Including Manuel, which is the problem. I still think the Mets will sweep Philly though. metirish Apr 29 2009 06:57 PM ] "I thought Santos had a better shot," Manuel said. "I think Santos has a little shorter swing, and when you have a little shorter swing, it's easier to get to a guy that's throwing in the upper 90s. If it had been a different, let's say a sinker-slider guy, Castro would have continued to hit." Kong76 Apr 29 2009 06:59 PM OMG, there was a thought process. Swan Swan H Apr 29 2009 07:09 PM Then why didn't he start Castro Tuesday and Santos today against Johnson, who throws in the upper 90s. And how does that explain the two ropes Castro hit off of Johnson who, it has been noted, throws in the upper 90s? Bunk, I say. A move for the sake of making a move. Rockin' Doc Apr 29 2009 07:22 PM Unlike Perez, Castro is apparently not one of Jerry's guys. John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 29 2009 07:34 PM It was a giant Fuck You disguised as a strategy. I'm sure he was trying to get the front office's attention. Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 08:23 PM I'm pretty sure it was more of a Fuck Off than a Fuck You, perhaps with a little Eat Shit and Die on the back. My word, what a severe disrespecting of Castro that move was... the whole week, in fact, has been. duan Apr 30 2009 10:33 AM [url:2si8vtww]http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/standings.php[/url:2si8vtww] ok so here's the deal, our runs scored/against totals would lead you to believe our record should be 10.4 wins 10.6 losses. .500 basically but essentially only one game out from where we are. However, if you look at the actual production of our hitters and pitchers, EQR and EQRA you see that we 'should' have a run differential that's a substantially more positive. That's probably being caused by one of three things or more likely a little of all of them - luck, bad defense (on our part) and bad in game management. metirish May 01 2009 10:06 AM Edgy DC May 01 2009 10:15 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 01 2009 10:36 AM I don't think there's anything new about pitch counts or that they're a bad idea. I just ask that they need to set limits with a more complex thought process than "100 sure sounds like a lot." Ceetar May 01 2009 10:18 AM ="Edgy DC":1tga2tmb]I don't think there's anything new about pitch counts or that they're a bad idea. I just ask that they need to set limits with a more complex thought process than "100 sure sounds like a lot."[/quote:1tga2tmb] Especially when 8 of them were intentional passes to Alfredo "The Babe" Amezega. I understand not pushing a guy too far when he's straining and struggling and his arm feels like it's going to fall off. When a guy blows them away in the 7th on 8 pitches? yeah, maybe let him start the 8th. Swan Swan H May 01 2009 11:45 AM I am starting to believe that part of this mess has to do with the presence of two career closers in the bullpen. Everything has been done to try to keep Putz on as equal footing with Rodriguez as possible, right down to the entrance music and video board hoopla for both guys. Is it not feasible that Manuel feels the need to (there's no easy way to write he next phrase) stroke Putz' ego, giving him his eighth innings while keeping Frankie on for the ninth? Letting a starter go eight disrupts the balance here, and all winter the talk was how they were essentially dual closers? If that is the case it needs to stop NOW. Santana should have been out there for the eighth Wednesday, no doubt. I just believe it was less about saving Santana than it was about getting Putz in the game in a crucial situation. Edgy DC May 01 2009 11:49 AM I think Putz was pitching the eighth because the plan is to pitch him the eighth. I don't think it's about his ego so much as about the formula on the page. In fact, I think sticking to the formula shows less respect for the player. As long as you go by the formula, it's always the player's fault when the team loses. "The eighth is his job. He didn't get it done." Benjamin Grimm May 01 2009 11:56 AM ="Swan Swan H":1ls4bnfd]Santana should have been out there for the eighth Wednesday, no doubt. [/quote:1ls4bnfd] Even Bill Gallo thinks so. Swan Swan H May 01 2009 11:57 AM And I think the plan is to pitch him in the eighth because he owns the eighth. Manuel would have bypassed a lesser light who had earned the eighth on merit, but Putz was decreed the eighth inning guy. You may not think that matters, but I think it matters a lot. Bypassing Duaner Sanchez or Aaron Heilman to go right to the closer is different, primarily because Mets management spent all winter answering questions about how happy Putz would be if he is not the closer. It matters. Fman99 May 01 2009 11:59 AM ="Edgy DC":10swftyk]I don't think there's anything new about pitch counts or that they're a bad idea. I just ask that they need to set limits with a more complex thought process than "100 sure sounds like a lot."[/quote:10swftyk] I blame the Base 10 number system. If we were binary, like computers, I suspect Johan would be allowed to throw 10000000 (translation = 128) pitches before he got the hook. Centerfield May 08 2009 08:43 AM We get on him when he's bad, so to be fair, we should mention it when he does something we like. I LOVE that Manuel got tossed last night after the Victorino con job. That ump is an idiot, and coupled with the blown DP call from before, absolutely deserved the mouthful Jerry gave him. I hope the ump watched both replays afterwards and felt like an asshole. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 08 2009 08:56 AM ="Centerfield":1ki0y39w]We get on him when he's bad, so to be fair, we should mention it when he does something we like. I LOVE that Manuel got tossed last night after the Victorino con job. That ump is an idiot, and coupled with the blown DP call from before, absolutely deserved the mouthful Jerry gave him. I hope the ump watched both replays afterwards and felt like an asshole.[/quote:1ki0y39w] Agreed. So... who do give the stinkeye for using a 37-million-dollar arm for a fourth night in a row with Putz (and Stokes) very much available to alterna-close? Centerfield May 08 2009 09:00 AM I have no problem with using him there. This is the Phils after all. Give him tonight, and maybe even tomorrow off. Frayed Knot May 08 2009 09:03 AM I didn't have a problem with using him either. It just suxx that the ump put us into a situation that led to using him. metirish May 08 2009 09:07 AM Rodriguez says he wanted the ball , do i believe that? I'm going to take him at his word. Manuel swears that Rodriguez will not pitch tonight. My wife was watching the game with me and after Rodriguez got the last out and did his emotional thing she said he screamed Pu�eta at the sky. She explained to me it's equivalent to screaming " hell yeah" in that situation as Rodriguez was excited about the out. Pu�eta though has many meanings . LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 08 2009 09:13 AM ="metirish"]Rodriguez says he wanted the ball , do i believe that? I'm going to take him at his word. Manuel swears that Rodriguez will not pitch tonight. My wife was watching the game with me and after Rodriguez got the last out and did his emotional thing she said he screamed Pu�eta at the sky. She explained to me it's equivalent to screaming " hell yeah" in that situation as Rodriguez was excited about the out. Pu�eta though has many meanings . My Filipino grandfather used to scream it at the television when a wrestler would pause too long on the top ropes, preening, before frog-splashing an opponent. I believe that it's usually meant to express disappointment or consternation, no? [As in, "Four days in a row? Pu�eta, isn't why we got a second closer in the first place?"] metirish May 08 2009 09:25 AM ] I believe that it's usually meant to express disappointment or consternation, no? Yes , but it also can be used to express excitement , missus also told me it means " jacking off" too batmagadanleadoff May 08 2009 09:27 AM Anybody take notice of Church striking out in the bottom of the eighth with a runner on first and nobody out after digging himself into an 0-2 hole with two bad sac bunt attempts? It appears as if Manuel favors the late inning sac bunt this season, what with Putz and K-Rod available to finish the game. This is the third time I remember Manuel using this strategy in the last two weeks. I didn't like this sac bunt attempt. Church had been double-switched into the 9th spot in the batting order: therefore, the top of the order followed. Whenever the ninth batter, or top of the order batter leads off the inning by getting on base, the team is especially poised for a big inning. I was able to tolerate the tactic more than usual only because the Mets already had a two run lead. But I would've been dead set against that bunt had the game been tied. Fman99 May 08 2009 09:32 AM ="metirish"]] I believe that it's usually meant to express disappointment or consternation, no? Yes , but it also can be used to express excitement , missus also told me it means " jacking off" too I should've read this whole thread before I started yelling "pu�eta" here at work. Whoopsie. John Cougar Lunchbucket May 08 2009 09:32 AM Actually, the Church bunt was a Sandy Alomar call, since Jerry had been run by that point. As I've said here a million times already there has to cpome a point where they start analyzing the sac bunt based on the chance they can even do it properly, much less its success when executed. Hate hate hate it. Edgy DC May 08 2009 09:33 AM I noticed. I liked it not. metirish May 08 2009 09:38 AM It may have been Manuel that called it , he could well have been in the tunnel shouting " Jesus Christ Sandy Church needs to put down a sac bunt". batmagadanleadoff May 08 2009 09:38 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":352csoiu]Actually, the Church bunt was a Sandy Alomar call, since Jerry had been run by that point. As I've said here a million times already there has to cpome a point where they start analyzing the sac bunt based on the chance they can even do it properly, much less its success when executed. Hate hate hate it.[/quote:352csoiu] I can't prove it, but I'd bet that Manuel "managed" to call for that sac bunt from wherever he was, underneath the Citi Field stands. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 08 2009 09:53 AM ="batmagadanleadoff"]="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]Actually, the Church bunt was a Sandy Alomar call, since Jerry had been run by that point. As I've said here a million times already there has to cpome a point where they start analyzing the sac bunt based on the chance they can even do it properly, much less its success when executed. Hate hate hate it. I can't prove it, but I'd bet that Manuel "managed" to call for that sac bunt from wherever he was, underneath the Citi Field stands. Wearing a fake second beard?

="John Cougar Lunchbucket":lsilnwnf]Talk to the guy who wrote out the lineup card. Oh wait, that's Jerry too.[/quote:lsilnwnf] I'd blame Omar Minaya for the Schneider/Castro catching corps first. Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 09:16 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 29 2009 09:30 AM I'll bite. Yeah, I'd rather let the Schneid swing the bat than bunt. And I'm looking to put Church in motion. The pitcher had given up a homer and a single and was on his last batter if he couldn't get an out, so why give him one? Schneider has the hole to shoot for and a pitcher on the ropes. Meyer hasn't had a much better career than the Schneid. And it's also an option to pinch-hit a righty there, isn't it? Or was Castro incapacitated or something? duan Apr 29 2009 09:26 AM ="Edgy DC":vwalgcck] Or was Castro incapacitated or something?[/quote:vwalgcck] is he ever not? LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 29 2009 09:29 AM ="batmagadanleadoff"]Perhaps I've already forgotten, but I don't recall Jerry bunting this season to the point where it's a nuisance. Schneider has already been called upon to sac bunt twice. So have Super-Hot Slappy Castillo and Ryan F-ing Church. Oh, and welcome Abordick, Ceetar. How do you REALLY feel about Jerry Manuel? Frayed Knot Apr 29 2009 09:31 AM Re: A disaster ="Ceetar":3kc4se6w]I think Manuel's been a disaster. I wasn't unhappy with Willie myself, but when it seemed likely a change is what this team needed, I wish they had done it. Instead they stuck with a familiar guy, a guy who'd been with the team for the collapses, as well as supposedly being the guy who was pushing for the 9th inning decisions in game 7 in '06. To me he's a guy who never trusts his players, to a point that he actively doesn't trust them and instills no confidence in them. I think they should've brought in someone from outside the team, with a fresh perspective, and had him work with Wright and Reyes to lead the team that way. Instead, Manuel has been second guessing Reyes and Wright since he got here. The big thing is his over use of the bullpen and how matchup happy he is, to a fault. I also have issues with how un-aggressive this team seems on the bases. Whether it's the lack of stolen bases, or not going first to third. I've heard Manuel say that he's told Reyes to pick his spots more. In previous years, _every_ body was bouncing around the bases, threatening to steal, taking big leads, distracting the pitcher so that it was rare that a pitcher was on the mound without at least some distraction with a guy on base. Even pitchers were doing it! Remember how we ran all over Chris Carpenter impressive streak of not allowing a lot of stolen bases, and how he hasn't been the same since? It's never too early to fire Manuel.[/quote:3kc4se6w] Welcome Ceetar, nice virgin post. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but you state your case well and I like your avatar. duan Apr 29 2009 09:38 AM sorry I should point out I'm not actually disagreeing, more mocking schneider. Who, frankly is worse then useless, this season it being him rather then any old league average hitter has cost us .533 runs per game, this season it being him rather then any old league average catcher has cost us .464 runs a game. And I know it's a small sample size, and I know his back and calf are hurting him. He's just a terrible offensive player. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 29 2009 09:41 AM ="Ceetar":2ojhbd60]Remember how we ran all over Chris Carpenter impressive streak of not allowing a lot of stolen bases, and how he hasn't been the same since?[/quote:2ojhbd60] Although the thought that Reyes makes him wake up in night sweats is a pleasant one, his "not being the same since" might have something to do with, you know, the shoulder and elbow injuries. Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 09:45 AM What's MM's right hand doing here? Ceetar Apr 29 2009 09:54 AM ="Edgy DC":250omu6m] What's MM's right hand doing here?[/quote:250omu6m] Icon inspired by this Kurt Snibbe post and the lion's new 'fiercer' logo: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=snibbe/090421&sportCat=nfl Yeah, Carpenter probably isn't waking up with nightmares about Reyes, but my point is that the Mets used to run the bases in a way that gave pitchers nightmares, and they don't anymore. batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 09:59 AM ="Ceetar"]... my point is that the Mets used to run the bases in a way that gave pitchers nightmares, and they don't anymore. Actually, the way the Mets used to run the bases under Willie gave me a nightmare. It seemed as if that team couldn't go one week without having one of their own thrown out at the plate by four or five footsteps. RealityChuck Apr 29 2009 10:09 AM ="Edgy DC":1qfj9mu7]And it's also an option to pinch-hit a righty there, isn't it? Or was Castro incapacitated or something?[/quote:1qfj9mu7] Basic baseball strategy 101 (as indicated by Earl Weaver*, who knew a thing or two): avoid using your last catcher as a pinch hitter. If the catcher gets injured (and catchers are more likely than other positions), you're screwed. *Weaver pointed out how important Elrod Hendricks was to the team, despite his poor offensive stats, since he allowed Weaver to switch catchers and still have Hendricks on the bench in case of injury. Rotblatt Apr 29 2009 10:10 AM ]Lifting a starter after six with 100 or so pitches and a five-run lead just fries my butt. Totally. He's been too quick to yank starting pitchers (up to and including Johann), and while, yes, our bullpen is better this year, if we overwork our relievers, it won't stay that way. I'm not a fan of the bunting either, but I feel like he's been better than Willie on that front, and leaving his decision to stick with Green last night aside, his bullpen management has been better as well. So I'm going to go with, he's an improvement, but he could be better. metirish Apr 29 2009 10:20 AM With the way this new park looks like it's going to play , a lot of doubles and triples , it would seem to suit smart aggressive play . I would like to see Beltran and Reyes play with more abandon . Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 10:21 AM ="RealityChuck":3pp7aa9r]="Edgy DC":3pp7aa9r]And it's also an option to pinch-hit a righty there, isn't it? Or was Castro incapacitated or something?[/quote:3pp7aa9r] Basic baseball strategy 101 (as indicated by Earl Weaver*, who knew a thing or two): avoid using your last catcher as a pinch hitter. If the catcher gets injured (and catchers are more likely than other positions), you're screwed. *Weaver pointed out how important Elrod Hendricks was to the team, despite his poor offensive stats, since he allowed Weaver to switch catchers and still have Hendricks on the bench in case of injury.[/quote:3pp7aa9r] I don't know if it's 101, but Bobby Valentine sure ignored it left and right. Earl Weave spent his career in the American League, and once 1973 came around, this issue was only theoretical to him, and so he never had to weight it against other values. He certainly didn't manage in an era of 12- and 13-man pitching staves, when nobody could afford to carry a third catcher. It's a valid value, but changing times and circumstances from Weaver's force it to be weighed fairly against other values. Ceetar Apr 29 2009 10:32 AM ="Edgy DC":27hreoq1]="RealityChuck":27hreoq1]="Edgy DC":27hreoq1]And it's also an option to pinch-hit a righty there, isn't it? Or was Castro incapacitated or something?[/quote:27hreoq1] Basic baseball strategy 101 (as indicated by Earl Weaver*, who knew a thing or two): avoid using your last catcher as a pinch hitter. If the catcher gets injured (and catchers are more likely than other positions), you're screwed. *Weaver pointed out how important Elrod Hendricks was to the team, despite his poor offensive stats, since he allowed Weaver to switch catchers and still have Hendricks on the bench in case of injury.[/quote:27hreoq1] I don't know if it's 101, but Bobby Valentine sure ignored it left and right. Earl Weave spent his career in the American League, and once 1973 came around, this issue was only theoretical to him, and so he never had to weight it against other values. He certainly didn't manage in an era of 12- and 13-man pitching staves, when nobody could afford to carry a third catcher. It's a valid value, but changing times and circumstances from Weaver's force it to be weighed fairly against other values.[/quote:27hreoq1] Last year, even when we had three catchers, both Willie and Manuel still seemed reluctant to use one. To me, It's a low-risk situation. Sure, it's possible your catcher gets hurt and you have to make someone else squat behind there. But to me, that's managing scared, managing not to lose. Try to win, and if that's using Castro off the bench, do it. metirish Apr 29 2009 10:38 AM We used to have Joe McEwing as the emergency catcher and IIRC Woodward more recently. Who on this team would serve in that role? Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 10:49 AM Santana, of course. batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 10:52 AM I'd like to see Johan catch his own pitches. Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 11:12 AM I want to see the 27-man roster and the abolition of the DH. Those two extra players would return us to the number of position players that were on rosters before pitching staffs increased in size from ten to twelve. Among other things, teams would be able to carry a third catcher. Frayed Knot Apr 29 2009 11:55 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":1wn2ynbr]I want to see the 27-man roster and the abolition of the DH. Those two extra players would return us to the number of position players that were on rosters before pitching staffs increased in size from ten to twelve. Among other things, teams would be able to carry a third catcher.[/quote:1wn2ynbr] No, it would allow managers to carry that 14th or 15th pitcher -- and LaRussa would use them all in certain games. Ashie62 Apr 29 2009 02:10 PM I want to see the aboltion of Jerry Manuel HahnSolo Apr 29 2009 02:26 PM Jerry certainly opened himself up to questions today, no doubt. mario25 Apr 29 2009 02:27 PM Hitting Santos for Castro today was absolutely dumb..... metirish Apr 29 2009 02:28 PM Howie on the radio was great during this move...." Jerry will probably say he's playing a hunch".... Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 02:31 PM There shouldn't even have been a bottom of the ninth. Frayed Knot Apr 29 2009 02:32 PM Probably banking on Santos being faster and less of a chance at a K. Ashie62 Apr 29 2009 02:32 PM Post game conference should be a hoot Somewhere, Castro is secretly happy Ceetar Apr 29 2009 02:44 PM Managing Scared Fire him before it�s too late. Send away the pitching and hitting coach while you're at it. If you're really desperate to keep HoJo with the organization, make him the new bench coach. Why give away 4 outs? Why pinch hit a guy that�s hot for a guy that wasn�t watching the game and hasn�t been watching what Lindstrom was throwing. We all know this team needs confidence. so what kind of confidence does it show Castro in that spot? Murphy that he�s replaced defensively and would�ve been up in the ninth? Reyes when you won�t let him steal early in the count or only hit and run and tell him when to go? Or that you're constantly bunting in front of him like he can't drive the guys in himself. Drawing the infield in in the first. Managing scared. Manuel set the stage from the very beginning saying �Even though it�s the first inning, I don�t think you guys are going to score enough runs to win if we let this run score.� Well, ask and you shall receive. Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 02:46 PM I can only imagine what the Pessimistic Mets Fan is saying. Ceetar Apr 29 2009 02:51 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":1qalul5w]I can only imagine what the Pessimistic Mets Fan is saying.[/quote:1qalul5w] Sadly, I think the pessimistic part is redundant for too many. Including Manuel, which is the problem. I still think the Mets will sweep Philly though. metirish Apr 29 2009 06:57 PM ] "I thought Santos had a better shot," Manuel said. "I think Santos has a little shorter swing, and when you have a little shorter swing, it's easier to get to a guy that's throwing in the upper 90s. If it had been a different, let's say a sinker-slider guy, Castro would have continued to hit." Kong76 Apr 29 2009 06:59 PM OMG, there was a thought process. Swan Swan H Apr 29 2009 07:09 PM Then why didn't he start Castro Tuesday and Santos today against Johnson, who throws in the upper 90s. And how does that explain the two ropes Castro hit off of Johnson who, it has been noted, throws in the upper 90s? Bunk, I say. A move for the sake of making a move. Rockin' Doc Apr 29 2009 07:22 PM Unlike Perez, Castro is apparently not one of Jerry's guys. John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 29 2009 07:34 PM It was a giant Fuck You disguised as a strategy. I'm sure he was trying to get the front office's attention. Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 08:23 PM I'm pretty sure it was more of a Fuck Off than a Fuck You, perhaps with a little Eat Shit and Die on the back. My word, what a severe disrespecting of Castro that move was... the whole week, in fact, has been. duan Apr 30 2009 10:33 AM [url:2si8vtww]http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/standings.php[/url:2si8vtww] ok so here's the deal, our runs scored/against totals would lead you to believe our record should be 10.4 wins 10.6 losses. .500 basically but essentially only one game out from where we are. However, if you look at the actual production of our hitters and pitchers, EQR and EQRA you see that we 'should' have a run differential that's a substantially more positive. That's probably being caused by one of three things or more likely a little of all of them - luck, bad defense (on our part) and bad in game management. metirish May 01 2009 10:06 AM Edgy DC May 01 2009 10:15 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 01 2009 10:36 AM I don't think there's anything new about pitch counts or that they're a bad idea. I just ask that they need to set limits with a more complex thought process than "100 sure sounds like a lot." Ceetar May 01 2009 10:18 AM ="Edgy DC":1tga2tmb]I don't think there's anything new about pitch counts or that they're a bad idea. I just ask that they need to set limits with a more complex thought process than "100 sure sounds like a lot."[/quote:1tga2tmb] Especially when 8 of them were intentional passes to Alfredo "The Babe" Amezega. I understand not pushing a guy too far when he's straining and struggling and his arm feels like it's going to fall off. When a guy blows them away in the 7th on 8 pitches? yeah, maybe let him start the 8th. Swan Swan H May 01 2009 11:45 AM I am starting to believe that part of this mess has to do with the presence of two career closers in the bullpen. Everything has been done to try to keep Putz on as equal footing with Rodriguez as possible, right down to the entrance music and video board hoopla for both guys. Is it not feasible that Manuel feels the need to (there's no easy way to write he next phrase) stroke Putz' ego, giving him his eighth innings while keeping Frankie on for the ninth? Letting a starter go eight disrupts the balance here, and all winter the talk was how they were essentially dual closers? If that is the case it needs to stop NOW. Santana should have been out there for the eighth Wednesday, no doubt. I just believe it was less about saving Santana than it was about getting Putz in the game in a crucial situation. Edgy DC May 01 2009 11:49 AM I think Putz was pitching the eighth because the plan is to pitch him the eighth. I don't think it's about his ego so much as about the formula on the page. In fact, I think sticking to the formula shows less respect for the player. As long as you go by the formula, it's always the player's fault when the team loses. "The eighth is his job. He didn't get it done." Benjamin Grimm May 01 2009 11:56 AM ="Swan Swan H":1ls4bnfd]Santana should have been out there for the eighth Wednesday, no doubt. [/quote:1ls4bnfd] Even Bill Gallo thinks so. Swan Swan H May 01 2009 11:57 AM And I think the plan is to pitch him in the eighth because he owns the eighth. Manuel would have bypassed a lesser light who had earned the eighth on merit, but Putz was decreed the eighth inning guy. You may not think that matters, but I think it matters a lot. Bypassing Duaner Sanchez or Aaron Heilman to go right to the closer is different, primarily because Mets management spent all winter answering questions about how happy Putz would be if he is not the closer. It matters. Fman99 May 01 2009 11:59 AM ="Edgy DC":10swftyk]I don't think there's anything new about pitch counts or that they're a bad idea. I just ask that they need to set limits with a more complex thought process than "100 sure sounds like a lot."[/quote:10swftyk] I blame the Base 10 number system. If we were binary, like computers, I suspect Johan would be allowed to throw 10000000 (translation = 128) pitches before he got the hook. Centerfield May 08 2009 08:43 AM We get on him when he's bad, so to be fair, we should mention it when he does something we like. I LOVE that Manuel got tossed last night after the Victorino con job. That ump is an idiot, and coupled with the blown DP call from before, absolutely deserved the mouthful Jerry gave him. I hope the ump watched both replays afterwards and felt like an asshole. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 08 2009 08:56 AM ="Centerfield":1ki0y39w]We get on him when he's bad, so to be fair, we should mention it when he does something we like. I LOVE that Manuel got tossed last night after the Victorino con job. That ump is an idiot, and coupled with the blown DP call from before, absolutely deserved the mouthful Jerry gave him. I hope the ump watched both replays afterwards and felt like an asshole.[/quote:1ki0y39w] Agreed. So... who do give the stinkeye for using a 37-million-dollar arm for a fourth night in a row with Putz (and Stokes) very much available to alterna-close? Centerfield May 08 2009 09:00 AM I have no problem with using him there. This is the Phils after all. Give him tonight, and maybe even tomorrow off. Frayed Knot May 08 2009 09:03 AM I didn't have a problem with using him either. It just suxx that the ump put us into a situation that led to using him. metirish May 08 2009 09:07 AM Rodriguez says he wanted the ball , do i believe that? I'm going to take him at his word. Manuel swears that Rodriguez will not pitch tonight. My wife was watching the game with me and after Rodriguez got the last out and did his emotional thing she said he screamed Pu�eta at the sky. She explained to me it's equivalent to screaming " hell yeah" in that situation as Rodriguez was excited about the out. Pu�eta though has many meanings . LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 08 2009 09:13 AM ="metirish"]Rodriguez says he wanted the ball , do i believe that? I'm going to take him at his word. Manuel swears that Rodriguez will not pitch tonight. My wife was watching the game with me and after Rodriguez got the last out and did his emotional thing she said he screamed Pu�eta at the sky. She explained to me it's equivalent to screaming " hell yeah" in that situation as Rodriguez was excited about the out. Pu�eta though has many meanings . My Filipino grandfather used to scream it at the television when a wrestler would pause too long on the top ropes, preening, before frog-splashing an opponent. I believe that it's usually meant to express disappointment or consternation, no? [As in, "Four days in a row? Pu�eta, isn't why we got a second closer in the first place?"] metirish May 08 2009 09:25 AM ] I believe that it's usually meant to express disappointment or consternation, no? Yes , but it also can be used to express excitement , missus also told me it means " jacking off" too batmagadanleadoff May 08 2009 09:27 AM Anybody take notice of Church striking out in the bottom of the eighth with a runner on first and nobody out after digging himself into an 0-2 hole with two bad sac bunt attempts? It appears as if Manuel favors the late inning sac bunt this season, what with Putz and K-Rod available to finish the game. This is the third time I remember Manuel using this strategy in the last two weeks. I didn't like this sac bunt attempt. Church had been double-switched into the 9th spot in the batting order: therefore, the top of the order followed. Whenever the ninth batter, or top of the order batter leads off the inning by getting on base, the team is especially poised for a big inning. I was able to tolerate the tactic more than usual only because the Mets already had a two run lead. But I would've been dead set against that bunt had the game been tied. Fman99 May 08 2009 09:32 AM ="metirish"]] I believe that it's usually meant to express disappointment or consternation, no? Yes , but it also can be used to express excitement , missus also told me it means " jacking off" too I should've read this whole thread before I started yelling "pu�eta" here at work. Whoopsie. John Cougar Lunchbucket May 08 2009 09:32 AM Actually, the Church bunt was a Sandy Alomar call, since Jerry had been run by that point. As I've said here a million times already there has to cpome a point where they start analyzing the sac bunt based on the chance they can even do it properly, much less its success when executed. Hate hate hate it. Edgy DC May 08 2009 09:33 AM I noticed. I liked it not. metirish May 08 2009 09:38 AM It may have been Manuel that called it , he could well have been in the tunnel shouting " Jesus Christ Sandy Church needs to put down a sac bunt". batmagadanleadoff May 08 2009 09:38 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":352csoiu]Actually, the Church bunt was a Sandy Alomar call, since Jerry had been run by that point. As I've said here a million times already there has to cpome a point where they start analyzing the sac bunt based on the chance they can even do it properly, much less its success when executed. Hate hate hate it.[/quote:352csoiu] I can't prove it, but I'd bet that Manuel "managed" to call for that sac bunt from wherever he was, underneath the Citi Field stands. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 08 2009 09:53 AM ="batmagadanleadoff"]="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]Actually, the Church bunt was a Sandy Alomar call, since Jerry had been run by that point. As I've said here a million times already there has to cpome a point where they start analyzing the sac bunt based on the chance they can even do it properly, much less its success when executed. Hate hate hate it. I can't prove it, but I'd bet that Manuel "managed" to call for that sac bunt from wherever he was, underneath the Citi Field stands. Wearing a fake second beard?

="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]Top 6th: NY Mets - D. Meyer relieved A. Sanchez - C. Beltran homered to deep left - R. Church singled to left - B. Schneider sacrificed to pitcher, R. Church to second - L. Castillo flied out to center - G. Sheffield hit for J. Maine - G. Sheffield intentionally walked - J. Reyes flied out to right 1 runs, 2 hits, 0 errors NY Mets 1, Florida 2 em, so what would you rather - Brian Schneider actually try to get a HIT??????

yeah but it didn't happen. Look, they're keeping Gooden's signature, they've gone on the record as acknowledging that people want more "METS" stuff, but to me this just seems like a crazy quest to beat people up over decisions that were made with decent intentions.

so I'm not a great witness. However, I have NO problem whatsoever in them having a special place for one of New York's most important ever sportsmen. It's clear that Jackie Robinson is something that baseball justifiably feels had an impact on the evolution of civil rights and of equality within your country. I can't see why honouring that is seen as anything but a pleasure. As for the Mets HOF, well I'd be inclined to think 2012 might be just around the right time for them to do it properly and in a way that has meaning. It'd have a very nice ring to it and would be a good way of celebrating 50 years.

when it's the World Cup or European Championships. Then it's not a game. No way Jos�.

you hope that people are so close to the start of the season that their roster's pretty set and that nobody has totally worn out their welcome so you get to sneak someone through, having said that the nationals are *CLEARLY* an outlier here, and you're right, they could definitely do worse then figgy.

I caught a decent bit of this series, so feel empowered enough to open the thread. 1. The starting pitching was less of an issue. Figgy's spot start was a big'un, and was a nice aspect of a frustrating game. Hernandez *nearly* had another very good outing, I do wonder is there some kind of signal that could have been spotted at the start of the 6th, BUT to be honest I was happy enough with his work. Johan Santana is fucking brilliant. 2. The runs will come. Tonight was the classic example - two swings of the bat that wouldn't normally result in double plays result in them. The IGT mentioned Reyes and Murph getting aboard but not at the same time. Similarly David Wright is yet to start hitting the ball with RISP. That's all going to happen, I'm cool with Jerry fiddling with the lineup a bit. The only person I'm worried about is Beltran, not because he isn't hitting well, but I just don't like him in the 5 hole. I'd be sorely tempted to bat Murphy/Sheff/Church 5/6 and get Beltran into the 2 hole, while flopping Delgado/Wright depending on the 5th hitter. I could be micro managing that though as Wright is probably more the 3 hitter then Delgado is. 3. The BullPen is a very good unit, I'm sure they'll blow up from time to time, but the structure is good, the combination of looks is good and it looks to me like Jerry isn't scared of going with the hot hand.

what's troubling is really that the mets 3,4,5 & 6 hitters have got off to pretty torrid starts. I know David Wright hasn't looked in sync but the OPS' of them go like .872 1.072 .905 1.099 that should be a sign of winning team, not a losing one.

plenty of hits with RISP tonight.

schnieder just won't hit that much will he.

hilariously, the bloke in ireland is able to watch it. only saw 2 of livian's 4 batters but for the final out he fielded a very hard hit shot straight back at him with ease. Just before that Cantu had hit what would have been a 2 run BOMB about 20 feet foul down the left hand line.

="metirish":unfrmjri]="duan":unfrmjri]can I do St LOUIS. I promise to do it as long as the mrs doesn't go into labour 5 days earlyl[/quote:unfrmjri] Congrats to you both , certainly we will understand if the KTE is late or if we are informed that it's been written from The Rotunda Hospital...[/quote:unfrmjri] well it'll be the coombe but that's the general picture! Fman99 Apr 18 2009 08:51 PM Can an admin sticky this thread? I almost missed my assignment... TheOldMole Apr 20 2009 01:52 AM Pencil me in for whatever. Frayed Knot Apr 27 2009 07:37 AM Looks like at Wrigley dates in late August plus both Houston series (there in late July and the season ender at Citi) are the only ones still unclaimed. Mole? Lunchbucket? Kong76 May 03 2009 05:43 PM Is this going to be a sticky for the whole season? Edgy DC May 03 2009 05:56 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 03 2009 06:27 PM How about we leave it up until the last four series are claimed? Kong76 May 03 2009 06:21 PM Just being a pita, the KTE's have been excellent this year. OlerudOwned May 04 2009 09:20 AM I'll have something up close to gametime. I've got finals to work around. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 05 2009 12:42 PM As I'm a touch absent-minded, I wouldn't mind seeing this as a season-long sticky. Am I in the minority? themetfairy May 05 2009 02:35 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":1zwd8yrh]As I'm a touch absent-minded, I wouldn't mind seeing this as a season-long sticky. Am I in the minority?[/quote:1zwd8yrh] I'd be cool with that. Kong76 May 05 2009 06:21 PM I think the KTE police can just remind people. It's a long season for one thing to dominate the top of the main forum. Are there teams left? I'll even take one to make it go away. Kong76 May 05 2009 06:26 PM I'll take the two Houston series, that leaves the at Wrigley series. (assuming FK was correct a number of posts back) I volunteer to be the KTE police. C'mon, at Wrigley, posters should be jumping from buildings to do the at Wrigley KTE! Swan Swan H May 05 2009 06:35 PM I'll take the @Wrigley series. It will give me a change to mock the preposterous items Chicagoans call snack food, plus there is a chance that Edmonds might re-sign with them and I can shit on his smug grimace a bit. Kong76 May 05 2009 06:39 PM Thanks Swan Swan H May 05 2009 06:42 PM I'll probably sneak the Cubs in there as well. Edgy DC May 11 2009 07:24 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 11 2009 07:40 AM Ollie Owned, any Brave New Updates? Looks like all our series are covered unless anyone wants to give an All Star preview. I'll unsticky. DateOpponentKTE AuthorApr 6-9@ CINGwreckApr 10-12@ FLAseawolf17Apr 13-16SDFrayed KnotApr 17-19MILTransMonkApr 21-23@ STLFman99Apr 24-26WASEdgy DCApr 27-29FLAseawolf17May 1-3@ PHISteveJRogersMay 4-5@ ATLOlerudOwnedMay 6-7PHIGYCMay 8-10PITG-FafifMay 11-13ATLOlerudOwnedMay 14-17@ SFLeiterWagnerFasterStrongrMay 18-20@ LADsharpieMay 22-24@ BOSGwreckMay 25-27WASEdgy DCMay 29-31FLAseawolf17Jun 1-4@ PITG-FafifJun 5-7@ WASbmfc1Jun 9-11PHIGYCJun 12-14@ NYYFrayed KnotJun 16-18@ BALGwreckJun 19-21TBmetsguyinmichiganJun 22-25STLduanJun 26-28NYYFman99Jun 29-Jul 1@ MILTransMonkJul 3-5@ PHISteveJRogersJul 7-9LADSharpieJul 10-12CINNymr83Jul 13-15ASBseawolf17Jul 16-19@ ATLOlerudOwnedJul 20-22@ WASbmfc1Jul 24-26@ HOUKong76Jul 27-30COLsmg58Jul 31-Aug 3ARZLeiterWagnerFasterStrongrAug 4-5STLduanAug 6-9@ SDFrayed KnotAug 10-12@ ARZLeiterWagnerFasterStrongrAug 14-17SF DocTeeAug 18-20ATLOlerudOwnedAug 21-24PHIGYCAug 25-27@ FLAseawolf17Aug 28-30@ CHCSwan Swan HSep 1-3@ COLsmg58Sep 4-6CHCFman99Sep 8-10FLAseawolf17Sep 11-13@ PHISteveJRogersSep 15-17@ ATLOlerudOwnedSep 18-20WASEdgy DCSep 21-23ATLOlerudOwnedSep 25-27@ FLAseawolf17Sep 28-30@ WASbmfc1Oct 2-4HOUKong76 seawolf17 May 11 2009 07:30 AM I don't have any series in the middle there. I'll take the ASG. Edgy DC May 11 2009 07:40 AM Egg-celent. Frayed Knot May 14 2009 10:55 AM LWFS, Sharpie, and GWreck up for the road trip Frayed Knot May 25 2009 12:51 PM Edgy & Seawolf up for the homestand GFaFiF & bmfc1 on deck Edgy DC Jun 01 2009 02:11 PM G-FaFiF, I hope your arm is loose because the phone is ringing. Frayed Knot Jun 09 2009 02:32 PM Frayed Knot (ooh, that's me. I almost forgot I took this one) plus GWreck & MGiMichigan need to kick their KTEs in gear for the upcoming series against the bastardized-DH league opponents. Swan Swan H Jun 12 2009 01:51 PM This thread may not be sticky-worthy, but maybe it should be moved to the KTE Archive for easier findage. SteveJRogers Jun 22 2009 03:35 PM Going to be a bit tied up with several issues around that time, so the Independence Day Weekend series is up for grabs. So to the Phillies, I must say SteveJRogers Jun 29 2009 10:16 AM Bump, see last post on previous page. Benjamin Grimm Jul 07 2009 01:57 PM Do we still need KTE's, or is it sufficient to say that they're the team that will score runs, while the Mets are the team that won't? metirish Jul 07 2009 02:36 PM Seo is probably busy doing a Mets KTE over at Dodgers Blues fan forum. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jul 07 2009 02:42 PM I think the tough one is tonight's game v Kershaw. I'm looking for Nick Evans to provide the big stick we need. Tomorrow we deal with Kuroda and the return of Ollie Perez (sorry haters, way better than Redding even when Redding's good, then we get Livan against the beatable if ornery Randy Wolf. Yes, I see a sweep. TransMonk Jul 07 2009 03:03 PM Didn't you say that about Milwaukee? sharpie Jul 07 2009 03:23 PM Just back from outta town driving my daughter to Virginia. No KTE but as Ben said, we don't need them. Everything from my first Dodger KTE applies except that Manny Ramirez is back, they are still winning and their sweep of the Mets was the beginning of the end of The Era of Good Feeling (at least with respect to the notion that we could get along without our star players). Vic Sage Jul 07 2009 03:39 PM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":x80ct4uk]I think the tough one is tonight's game v Kershaw. I'm looking for Nick Evans to provide the big stick we need. Tomorrow we deal with Kuroda and the return of Ollie Perez (sorry haters, way better than Redding even when Redding's good, then we get Livan against the beatable if ornery Randy Wolf. Yes, I see a sweep.[/quote:x80ct4uk] Jonny, yer a bright light in the dark night of my Metsian soul. Fman99 Jul 07 2009 07:28 PM ="Vic Sage":iucjv01f]="John Cougar Lunchbucket":iucjv01f]I think the tough one is tonight's game v Kershaw. I'm looking for Nick Evans to provide the big stick we need. Tomorrow we deal with Kuroda and the return of Ollie Perez (sorry haters, way better than Redding even when Redding's good, then we get Livan against the beatable if ornery Randy Wolf. Yes, I see a sweep.[/quote:iucjv01f] Jonny, yer a bright light in the dark night of my Metsian soul.[/quote:iucjv01f] Wow. I tried to conjure up some optimism but all I could muster was another alcohol-themed beverage. Edgy DC Jul 15 2009 01:23 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jul 16 2009 08:24 AM OlerudOwned, how about them Braves? I hear they have a new outfield. seawolf17 Jul 15 2009 01:36 PM Right, but we know all about him already. We should call Jeff Francoeur and ask him to do a special guest KTE. Edgy DC Jul 15 2009 01:41 PM You, by the way, never turned in your KTASE essay. Frayed Knot Jul 16 2009 07:51 AM 2nd Half Assignments DateOpponentKTE AuthorJul 16-19@ ATLOlerudOwnedJul 20-22@ WASbmfc1Jul 24-26@ HOUKong76Jul 27-30COLsmg58Jul 31-Aug 3ARZLeiterWagnerFasterStrongrAug 4-5STLduanAug 6-9@ SDFrayed KnotAug 10-12@ ARZLeiterWagnerFasterStrongrAug 14-17SF DocTeeAug 18-20ATLOlerudOwnedAug 21-24PHIGYCAug 25-27@ FLAseawolf17Aug 28-30@ CHCSwan Swan HSep 1-3@ COLsmg58Sep 4-6CHCFman99Sep 8-10FLAseawolf17Sep 11-13@ PHISteveJRogersSep 15-17@ ATLOlerudOwnedSep 18-20WASEdgy DCSep 21-23ATLOlerudOwnedSep 25-27@ FLAseawolf17Sep 28-30@ WASbmfc1Oct 2-4HOUKong76 Kong76 Jul 22 2009 05:53 PM If anyone wants to pinch hit in Houston for me, feel free. If I don't see anything by late morning, I'll whip up something during lunch if I can. My time during the weekdays is pretty stretched lately. Rockin' Doc Jul 22 2009 10:14 PM We have seen the enemy and it is us. Kong76 Jul 23 2009 04:07 AM For some reason I was thinking there was a Thursday game ... cool, more time to procrastinate! smg58 Jul 23 2009 11:35 AM I won't get the Rockies post up before Monday, but I should have it up by this time Monday afternoon. Edgy DC Jul 31 2009 10:54 AM LindsayWagnerFasterStronger, you're up. Edgy DC Aug 04 2009 02:54 PM DocTee, do you hear me?

Santana 4 Green 1.25 Putz 1 Rodriguez 1 Murphy 1 Church .75 Wright .5 Castillo .5

a yanks loss, a philly loss and a mets win, cause if so we could be in good shape for the first one of the year (counting last night's philly loss).