Ceetar

she's been writing for The7Line as of recently, and before that was part of a radio show on some misogynistic website. I think it'll be typical social media content stuff, but I guess we'll see.

you think vision is why he can't locate his pitches?

I think Josh Lewin is enjoying this the most. or Maj. The radio broadcast is practically a must listen tonight.

Good, so we're in agreement. There's no communication breakdown, and "Sandy will address it tomorrow" was the proper way to not say anything. That they're not having a special/additional press conference is maybe good hope?

d'Kong76 wrote: 41Forever wrote: They have a staff for that, and Sandy has more important things to do. Yeah! Lackeys, minions and on a good day interns (underpaid or not paid at all). Still no press conference time on Twitter. This team tweets when Mr. Met farts, but this news just isn't as important I guess. it's the regularly scheduled press briefing before the homestand. Typically 4ish I think.

41Forever wrote: Sandy and John Ricco should not be answering texts from reporters. They have a staff for that, and Sandy has more important things to do. Do reporters care about that? If they get/have a number, I'm sure they're going to use it. Also none of the lesser 'sources' that may know about the MRI results leaked it either.

they have people to respond to text messages directly to Sandy Alderson? to John Ricco? To whichever other 'source'? On an off day? 41Forever wrote: They actually have people on staff to do this. You draft a short response -- "We're conducted some initial tests on Cespedes' thumb, and are going to conduct some follow-up tests to make sure he's cleared to play. We expect to have more information before today's game." -- and you email it to whomever asks you the question. They all have to check the box showing that they asked, and the Mets have to check the box showing that they responded. Not that hard. That's basically what they did. They told everyone he was having an MRI. When asked about the results they said "at the press briefing tomorrow" It's not a failure of communication.

MFS62 wrote: Then I'll answer all 18 of them - one time, in an "official setting" - and get pissed if they ask me the same question again. Remember, the question is about when he'll be able to play. The answer is a date. You shouldn't have to explain or clarify a date. It is very specific. Anybody who has to ask a follow up question about a date isn't worth answering. They are either argumentative or stupid. Or both. Later yes, the official setting is later today, not yesterday by text message. it's not a date, it's a timetable. Giving a date is how you get columns a week from now taht say things like "The Mets promised 3 days and it's been 7, waah!"

can you believe he was so salacious that he SAT DOWN? omg, I can't imagine it.

TransMonk wrote: Seriously, fuck this guy. seriously. Doesn't he know only good players are allowed to have a good time?

MFS62 wrote: When someone asks me a question, I answer it. If I don't have the answer, I tell them I'll let them know when I have the answer. If they ask me that same question again, I start to get irritated. If they ask me that same question again, I really get pissed off. I'd tell them the fact that you're asking me again doesn't change when I'll have the answer. Later What if when you answer the first person's question, in a non-official setting, 18 people then contact you and have related, similar, and followup questions?

d'Kong76 wrote: So when is this press conference, there's nothing on the twit nor mlb-site? Sandy will talk with the media before the homestand. I didn't see what time.

giving out half-baked updates to random media folk is not good communication. 90% of the bad communication rap the Mets get/got was a result of information leaking out before being finalized, or out of context quotes, or editorializing. Curbing that, especially in a way that doesn't actually block the public from any information, is a good thing. Just like Harvey's allowed to say no comment, the Mets are allowed to say "we'll talk about this at the press conference" This also allows them have Cespedes show up first and get evaluated. If it's a good MRI, they still have no more info to go on and leaking a "all clean" is misleading if Yoenis shows up today and it hurts. If it's bad, they need to back and forth him and decide treatment and plan, leaking any of that before hand might lead to a misleading window of recovery or something. They control the message by waiting. I get that.

d'Kong76 wrote: This is bullshit, just report report the MRI results. So the garbage media can twist it before they've had a chance to decide how to proceed and then hold them to their initial impressions which may be wildly inaccurate? nah. The media hasn't really liked this new tactic, but it's seemed to work a little better for controlling expectations on injuries. And did any of these so called reporters make some calls to Vegas and try to figure out if someone was scratched or called up? doubt it.

Centerfield wrote: Mets say they will not update today. Wtf is that all about. gives the media time to right speculative columns. word is Sandy's just going to give all the updates at the pre-homestand press conference tomorrow. could be bad news, could just be they don't want to leak trickles to every writer that texts them and would rather control the message/delivery. That does track with reason history.

seawolf17 wrote: Nymr83 wrote: If he was ever actually ready, you figure it out. Gonzalez wont be here forever so that's the roater spot. Playing time? Earn it. This. Ultimately, it's going to be months before he's MLB ready. And it's impossible to say where we'll be when that time comes. If he's magically healed and MLB ready right now, though, you're right, there's no place for him on the roster. Thankfully, that's not an issue. 'magically' healed, no. DH/once a week/PH ready? seeya Jose.

Wheeler's kinda been okay. Vargas will probably be better than that? I dunno, weather warms up, Eiland's message starts to solidify, you hope some of these guys start to find more of a rhythm.

Cespedes? Always seems like he's somewhat banged up.

Gonzalez is better than Bruce, and with the exception of last year, always has been. There's no reason to give Bruce time there. Gonzalez has a puny BABIP. he's hitting the ball hard, he's walking, he's not playing horrible defense. If he keeps it up the hits will fall like they did yesterday.

Vic Sage wrote: bullshit. Familia sucked last year, and he's blown too many wins so far this year. Hey, Mickey, what happened to accountability? What happened to "closer by committee" and using different guys to close depending on the situation? Isn't that what we heard in ST? You sent Wheeler, to AAA and dropped Harvey out of the rotation, so you know how to do it. Lets see Gsellman get a few chances to close. Use familia to get a K in the 7th once in a while. No. closer by committee was never a thing. It was always Familia with the intention of not ignoring obvious better matchups. Mostly things like letting Blevins get big lefties even in the 9th or bringing Familia in the 8th if that's where the save is happening and replacing him in the 9th if pitch count/matchup warrants. Gsellman and Familia have near identical numbers right down to blown saves. Gsellman presumably has the arm strength to go a little longer at the moment, so might as well use him in the 6th/7th when maybe you can get the 8th from him too. Callaway's been pretty good with the bullpen so far, including seemingly less dry humping. His management style feels pretty much like what he said he was going to do.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: No rookie first basemen till they prove they're way too good for the minors. We shoulda learned that last year. Hopefully that's the case before we have to take Gonzo out of his misery Rosario, I don't mind. He's still real young, he's hitting No. 9, his D has been pretty good when he pays attention and he's going to get better. It's not like we have a better candidate inhouse anyway. I mean, you could put Cabrera there and play Flores at second I guess. or sign someone/trade someone. But Rosario has potential and you gotta roll with it a little. I don't mind Rosario, but he's not actually hitting, nor walking. Hopefully he will on both counts. It does seem like sometimes he has good AB but gets a little jumpier late in games in big spots. That's probably just anecdotal though. John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I can't remember Conforto's last xbh. Looks like it's been two weeks. On the other hand, he literally hasn't had a game where he hasn't been on base yet. his wRC+ is still above average. He could certainly help more, production wise, but at least he's getting on.

d'Kong76 wrote: Ceetar wrote: get out of here with pitcher wins. Generally speaking, pitchers who win 18 games are a tad better than suck. It may not be the sexiest roto-sabr-fantasy-projection stat but I think we'd be hard pressed over the years to find a pitcher with 18 wins or more and say he flat out sucks(ed). We, meaning the reasonable folks reading this. okay, but we're not talking generally, we're talking specifically. flat out sucked? maybe. is not good? not hard. Vargas is a specific example of that. The best pitchers tend to accumulate wins because they're typically on the mound more, regularly, and longer. They also get more vitamin D. It's like looking at beer sales volume and concluding that Citi Field is the most popular bar in NYC. John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Yeah as stinky as the relief pitching has been at times, and as bad as the butt-end starters have been, we lose because we're not scoring enough. Conforto, Ces, Bruce all gotta start whacking. Conforto's been sorta alright. It's Rosario I'm kinda focusing in on. Gonzalez too, but at least there seems to be some indication of bad luck there ,and he walks some.

get out of here with pitcher wins.

d'Kong76 wrote: Though well-struck, the ball only had a 17 percent hit probability, per Statcast This stuff drives me crazy, it was clearly at 19 percent. weighted value based on the position of the sun?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm really not looking for Vargas to be spectacular. I want him to give us seven decent innings. he's not going to. Vargas isn't getting to the third time through a lot. The Mets are hoping for a lot of 5-6 IP 2-3run games from him.