Ceetar

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I suppose so. I remain impressed with Ceets' determination to read motivation into such an innocuous passage. Does anyone doubt that if Scooter does miss opening day the print reporters would be slammed for having mislead us? see, but the way Sherman wrote he he's both blameless and culpable in both outcomes. Though usually they're quick to get out ahead of the injury and put the blame on the Mets somewhere. Because he's literally reporting on a routine appointment. This is a "no news is good news" situation. It's a healing as expected checkup on a procedure. it's not actually good news, as it's being spun universally where I've seen it. It's just news, as far as 'no setbacks but haven't actually tested anything' is news. But this is par for the course when you have to file filler content in slow times. It's similar to the "Mets remain interested in Lorenzo Cain but talks haven't progressed" that will probably make headlines today or tomorrow. Actually maybe not today or tomorrow, they're busy promoting Boras' clients for him right now, because he's using big words and analogies!

It's because he injected his own personal pessimism into the statement. the news is his checkups were good. He even doubles down with "he should be a full-go" and then makes up a reason for the Mets to, in fact, not have him at full-go. It's a direct contradiction. It's like he thought "Oh, did I just say it's all fine and dandy? instead of rewriting i'll just tack on some hedg-y words that don't come from the Mets but will 'cover my bases'" It's like waiting until Alderson's like "no deal" and saying "I clearly meant _pending physicals_"

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Joel Sherman wrote: Michael Conforto has received excellent medical updates from his surgeons and should be swinging a bat by late January, according to his representatives. Conforto, who had left shoulder surgery in September, is working out regularly and should be a full-go for spring training, at which point it will be up to the Mets to decide if they want to limit his at-bats and have him gradually build up and potentially even miss Opening Day. This is why we hate you Sherman "Hey Mets fans, good news, Conforto's on track! but let's talk about him missing Opening Day anyway."

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: I mean, you could also overlay for Otani and take the penalty, no? no.

The Mets did not save/collect pool money to bid on Otani. You could argue that this is wise. Get players you want, you think are good, that you can get. Take the sure gets over the random lottery in Otani because having say 5 million or 2 million is not going to make a difference and what happens if you don't get him and then you didn't sign anyone good? Though the flip side is maybe he doesn't want to give up the signing bonus altogether, and the Mets basically are tapped out. (You can add that up below, 4.75 is where they started) New York Mets Ronny Mauricio, ss, Dominican Republic (No. 3 prospect), $2.1 million. Adrian Hernandez, of, Dominican Republic (No. 16 prospect), $1.5 million. Stanly Consuegra, of, Dominican Republic (No. 40 prospect), $500,000. David Marcano, rhp, Venezuela (No. 49 prospect) Federico Polanco, ss, Dominican Republic, $325,000. Eduardo Salazar, of, Venezuela Patricio Diaz, of, Dominican Republic, $100,000. Robert Colina, rhp, Venezuela Read more at http://www.baseballamerica.com/international/2017-team-team-international-signing-trackers/#C4V68QYRPcgjfl2p.99

Edgy MD wrote: On second thought, there's probably a cap on the amount of bonus pool money/space a team can trade because that's the sort of nonsense there tends to be. They can acquire up to 75 percent of their original pool allocation in 2017-18 and 2018-19, then after that they can trade for up to 60 percent of their original pool Read more at http://www.baseballamerica.com/international/new-mlb-international-signing-rules/#j00glA560p8TOc8b.99 Also they lose 500k if they sign a QO guy (though I guess they'd lose it for next year?) Anyway, people seem to think it won't matter since Otani's giving up so much to play here that it's about the best situation to play here. Mets/NY might offer certain opportunities that say, Kansas City, does not. There's quite a bit we don't know about his motivations.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: He's not required to make the minimum, is he? yes. he'll be the same as any other guy from the normal regular draft. 6 years of control or whatever it is. if he waits 2 years he'd be until the other 'Japanese import' system that would allow them to pay him anything. Where this gets interesting is that everyone assumes teams are going to have an unwritten agreement to tear up the amateur contract for an extension that pays big bucks, probably after the first year, but how to do this to pretend it didn't happen now, during these negotiations, when it's not allowed to happen? I posted some numbers earlier in this thread about the biggest first-year buy-outs.

Edgy MD wrote: Apart from objecting to it in the extreme, I can't for the life of me figure out the international bonus pool thingie. Shouldn't that only apply to bonuses, rather than salary? yes. He'll make major league minimum next year with whoever he signs with.

Vic Sage wrote: the money comes out of the team's Int'l signing pool money, and Mets have almost no more available. I read that the most they can offer is $150k. Other teams have millions available. so the point is moot. there's a lot of dirty dealing about to happen. He's giving up tens of millions to come now instead of waiting two years. The specific first year totals may not even matter.

Frayed Knot wrote: Using him elsewhere, even if only occasionally, would help solve the short bench problem. He mostly DH'd in Japan, and even then only in games that were several days prior to his scheduled starts which typically are once per week over there. That's part of why the DH league would be a better showcase for his talents. Arguably not as he'll be pitching more often here and in the NL he'll actually get to bat during those starts. And the NL gets way more pinch hit appearances where you could conceivably use him versus trying to juggling trying to find him part-time DH duties.

A Boy Named Seo wrote: What say you?!! I think you should scroll [crossout]down[/crossout] up.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: (Any covers that are published before the day of the last poll, November 29, will be eligible.) So still a chance the winner hasn't even been written yet.

Centerfield wrote: Also, Carlos Santana. Looked at his numbers. Kinda looks like Duda with a little less power. They're very similar. Santana walks more, homers less. Fangraphs seems to have Duda as the slightly better defender. Switch hitter though. I mean, they're both pretty good so you can't really go wrong and I'm not sure it's even reasonable to expect Smith to ever be _better_ than that?

I think cared for is like the urine thing. "Oh good, you're hydrated. I hope you're eating healthy too!" I imagine sleep will come up too.

Again, we don't know their finances and it depends on how you define 'Mets' revenue. Does that include SNY? naming rights? revenue from renting out Citi Field to Beyonce? We know they took various loans. We don't know if they're specifically using 'Mets' revenue to repay those loans. What we know is that the Wilpons have additional expenses that are loans from these things. (this isn't exactly unique to them) Those expenses also don't go away in a sale. It'd be part of the equation. And a new owner would've just spent a billion dollars and would be unlikely to want to operate something at a loss. they might even want to make a little profit to start recouping some of that.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Yes, I agree that the third-time through thing should be more applicable to some pitchers than to others. But if Montero is cruising, let him test the third round of the lineup, but perhaps keep him on a short leash. And if deGrom is having a bad day, then maybe you do pull him after about 20 batters. Statistically there seems to be no such thing as momentum/cruising. A pitcher's career line is more predictive of how he'll pitch in the 6th inning than the 5 innings that preceded it. So if Montero has a 2-hit 1-BB shutout going into the 6th of a 1-run game, you still lift him for a good reliever.

I've said this before but I'm pretty sure you're deluding yourself if you think [random owner inserted] would suddenly just start pouring their own money into the Mets above and behind what the Mets themselves generate.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: He also sounds like he's willing to let pitchers go deeper into games and run up higher pitch counts, which of course is consistent with the 240-innings thing. This very much contradicts what we're seeing in the "Marc Carig" thread, about having starters avoid a third trip through the opposing lineup. Love the data and science approach. makes me happy. I assume he'll also consult with Eiland on that stuff. But it's not contradicting Carig (and didn't Alderson confirm that?) who suggested that deGrom and Thor wouldn't be as subject to the third time through thing? Presumably this very much matters on which pitchers the Mets have and how they're doing (and the score) but the third time through penalty is a real thing and if he's using data and analysis I'd be surprised if he's not quick to go to a reliever for Wheeler or Montero if it comes to that.

I didn't say it was absurd (and neither did Frayed Knot, he was responding to the idea that the injuries won't disappear until..) But the Mets front office is huge. There are pretty much people you could get to 'confirm' roughly any opinion you have. This is why there is always someone willing to kick someone who's on his way out the door. I'm not saying it's a conspiracy, I'm saying, especially in a dead period right now between the end of the season and actual trades/signings, there's a lot of sports writers just filling space. The Mets have this reputation because they have this reputation because we keep writing about this reputation because they have this reputation because it's easy to write about this.. See, there are always. ALWAYS going to be disagreements on which players the mets should or shouldn't sign, what they should or shouldn't do. There will ALWAYS be expensive players or 'all in' scenarios that the Mets reject on no more than difference of opinion or separate valuations that we aren't privy too. Medical decisions are the same way. There are always difference courses of action, different protocols, different workout regimes. It will ALWAYS be possible for a disagreeing writer to paint that as them being cheap or disfunctional because you happen to dislike Barwis or Jeff snubbed you once or Ray Ramirez looked like your ex's new boyfriend. Or you had a hamstring strain once and your doctor said THIS so why are the Mets disagreeing with that treatment? they must be full of it. I'm not saying Jeff doesn't "meddle" but I bet more than half of the employees in the world would describe their boss, or their bosses boss, as meddling. Listen to any water cooler talk in any office and there will be grumblings about the way upper management runs things and what they prioritize. Now take one or two of those quotes, and apply it vaguely to the whole direction of the organization, and tell me it means something? nah. Maybe Jeff (definitely Jeff?) shoved Barwis at the Mets because of a personal relationship/history. But it's not like he picked a cobbler and told him you're in charge of the uniforms or picked a pre-med student he went to school with who switched fields. He's an actual trainer who's qualified for the job. If I asked YOU to pick someone for a job you'd be more likely to hire someone you're familiar with too. In summary, I think Jeff probably meddles too much, is not a very good owner (but it's so hard to evaluate this stuff) and pays too much attention to expected public/media response. But I think these things are extremely minor and are no way hamstringing the Mets in any meaningful way.

smg58 wrote: Lance Lynn looks like a bargain compared to Darvish and Arrieta. He had a higher ERA+ last season than either of them (Lynn 124, Arrieta 123, Darvish 118); his FIP suggests there might have been some luck involved, but it was his first year back from TJS and he's a good bet to improve. more than some. It was a whole season too, but before that he was a consistently solid mid-rotation guy. Depends if you think the reduced Ks and increased BBs can revert to pre-2017 levels or you think that and the HR spike are a result of the juicier ball and he's basically garbage. .244 BABIP. Seems like at best he was effectively wild. Digging a little more it looks like it was cutter/changeup movement that may have had an impact. So I guess there's hope that he can replicate that, there was a lot of out of zone contact, but hitters may adjust to a new scouting report..

it took me only a few minutes to find an example of a Yankees injury that the Mets would've gotten killed for. May second: The Yankees announced Tuesday afternoon they have placed the slumping first baseman on the 10-day DL with a right ankle bruise. Bird initially hurt his ankle late in spring training Oh, you hurt your ankle? meh, play through it for a month. Oh wait you suck, I guess it's the ankle, let's get you some rest. Three weeks later: He's supposed to leave Sunday for Tampa," Girardi said, along with quipping about the slugger "flying" around the bases when asked about his running program early on Friday at Yankee Stadium. Oh, great. So he's fine now. just needed some rest right? Mid July: has ankle surgery. But it's fine, things happen right? not like the team would publicly blame the player right? 'The Daily News' Bill Madden reported earlier this month that team brass had become "exasperated" with Bird's inability to stay healthy and even was questioning his desire to return.' oh.

The Yankees SHOULD have the same reputation, it's that the media has decided the Mets do and 'dig' for it. (I guarantee someone asked about Jeff's involvement versus no one asking about Hal's)

All you have to do is look at other teams to realize that any effect the Wilpons have on these things is minimal at best.

Mighty Sore [crossout:2nlwfc00]Thor[/crossout:2nlwfc00]. Tied together better and better represents what it all means.