Ceetar

Edgy MD wrote: The St. Louis Browns mascot character was a brownie. mascots? The current Astros mascot, Orbit, zapped and killed the former mascot General Admission in the second to last game at the Astrodome.

he's poised to have the least bad season he's had since 2013 but I can't help but wonder if some of that is favorable park factors

d'Kong76 wrote: Hard for me to imagine Wright providing all-star quality solidness and it will have to come from elsewhere. I thought Bruce was back, but fizzled... Bruce is garbage and has always been garbage. They need to stop punting defense.

d'Kong76 wrote: As hard as it is to watch games like this, I have to think they have a small run or two in them with some other teams losing to make it interesting come mid-July. What's the GB over-under on 7/15 to mail it in I guess is my question tonight... aggravated-over-current suckitude aside? I'm gonna say 8.5. 6 head to head +1 game per month puts it at about 8.5. I do think this team is going to have a solid second half, but they seem to be digging themselves a nice pit where it'd have to be more than solid. Like Thor and David Wright healthy solid.

Terry's not the one failing to pitch and I think it'd be foolish not to conduct the search for his replacement with the full due-diligence you can only give it during the offseason. That's how you end up with "managers" like Jerry Manuel

i feel like he's still injured.

Duda is pretty good. ceremony was a wee bit early for me to sneak out for today, but I took pictures yesterday.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I heard that Gottfried did a Mets version of his Aristocrats routine in the booth, with the Wilpons in the role of the aristocratic family. Is that true? If you remind me on Monday while I'm at work I might fire up the archive audio and listen?

cooby wrote: Do we still think Beltran is a met in the Hall of Fame? he should be. There's a chance he's a no-capper.

Centerfield wrote: Ceetar wrote: I'm not objecting to him being fired. I'm merely pointing out this means virtually nothing to the Mets or Mr. Mets image. I think you cannot be more wrong. Like the Bobby Bonilla contract, or Madoff, or Vince Coleman and the firecracker, this is the type of thing that tends to stick. Five years from now, someone will mention Mr. Met and some annoying guy will bring up this incident. yes, but that annoying guy doesn't actually _mean_ anything. And Vince Coleman and the firecracker certainly is history. What relevance does that have on anything today? Annoying memes around the Mets are not the same as the Mets themselves.

Why are we not letting the Mr. Met employee 'rehabilitate' his image? (Because someone else can do exactly what he can do with no loss of value) I'm not objecting to him being fired. I'm merely pointing out this means virtually nothing to the Mets or Mr. Mets image. Also a middle finger is pretty tame and anyone dismissed from a job because they posed with a margarita on a beach or something equally mild should definitely have a gripe and should probably sue if it was made clear that that's why they were dismissed.

I didn't change anyone's position I suggested a different one might perhaps be more valid. He said Pratt's action make him a first ballot dope in reference to you suggesting his HR->Single could be the difference in a HoF case. I presented the opinion that the spectacle of it actually elevates the lesser stat well over any minute value the difference in scoring makes. I'm not really sure what point I'm missing, perhaps make it clearer?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Ceets I think you're underestimating how delicate a thing a brand is. Brands are not fluid. They are constructs that exist only because they adhere to parameters given them. I'm not talking about a guy in a suit but an idea. That's what got screwed up last night and there's no going back. Sure, to you. But to me, it's exactly the same. Nothing is screwed up. The brand is what the brand was. That's what I mean by fluid. the perception of what the brand is exists in different states for me and you, and is probably different than what the Mets try to project it as. And what they're going to continue to project it as. That he flipped off a guy once is going to barely register in a month, never mind years from now. I mean, are you really going to look at Mr. Met tomorrow dancing on the dugout and think "secretly you're an angry asshole and this feels fake"? It only hurts the brand because you, and a bunch of others, think it does. Some people think having multiple Mr. Mets and wide outreach and appearing at banks hurts/dillutes the brand but the exposure and spread of it to new people might override that in the Mets eyes. And what exactly is that brand? To me Mr. Met is a happy go lucky mascot who's a little silly and enthusiastic. But to me that doesn't preclude him from occasionally getting angry.

Edgy MD wrote: You're deliberately missing both my point and his. no, I'm just making a different point. There is no consistency in scoring from scorer to scorer from year to year from decade to decade. They score things by convention and those conventions often change. There's not really a 'right' way to have it all equal.

SteveJRogers wrote: Ceetar wrote: Meh, it breaks the fourth wall for a moment while everyone gets their yuks in, and then it's business as usual. I mean, it's not like people stop taking their children to sesame place because an Elmo in Times Square sexually assaulted everyone woman that walked by. You would have to be an utter mark if you think any of the characters in Times Square are licenced by the property owners. So that being said, it would be a big deal if the Elmo at Seasme Place did sexually assault every woman who walked by. If you are an employee, you kind of should have some decorum when it comes to dealing with idiot customers. I mean if an usher, vendor or security personnel did that, you'd probably agree with it being handled by the company in the same manner, right? Of course the characters aren't licensed, but you know what? It's still Elmo. The headline is still "Elmo assaults women" If the Elmo in question was actually an employee of ..Sesame Place? HBO? he'd be fired and we'd move on. I believe that you just can't take these things too seriously. These are not monoliths that are immovable. they're people and brands and fluid. It's just like not holding up Athletes as heroes who can do no wrong. (And really, still employing Jose Reyes is more damaging to the image than Mr. Met doing anything) These are actors in a play, and occasionally they err and it breaks the illusion. You lol and move on. You give the rest of the employees a stern talking to, internally.

G-Fafif wrote: Edgy MD wrote: A walkoff grand slam instead of a one-run single, in the post-season? That could be the difference in a guy's Hall of Fame case. In the judgment of a friend, that move put Pratt into the Hall of Unforgivable Dopes on the first ballot. I'd argue just the opposite. The Grand Slam single ELEVATES his case. It's more memorable. How did Ventura do in the postseason? He's remembered as a big hero right? That's a key moment. a game-winning hit that was quirky. His numbers are garbage in the postseason. And an extra 3 bases would not make a meaningful difference in that. He's actually one of the big reasons the Mets LOST that NLCS.

You can't punt when you are so much in control yet. But the Mets are likely to pull a big twist this year, and if the pitching can stay healthy and round out, they'll actually be pretty fine. Granderson, Bruce, Reyes, Flores, TJ Rivera, Cabrera, Walker. You could move most of these with almost no problem (Barring injury obviously) You pick up some other pieces here and there that work out, you play Lagares and Rosario and you've suddenly got a not horrible defensive team that's both scoring runs and pitching. Big roster shake up is coming without punting. the playoff team is going to barely resemble the opening day one.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: This is "funny" but totally not funny. That the Mets just put any party-patrol dumbass in the clothing of its most recognizable branding icon is just unconscionably stupid and reckless. They cut every corner even on their own identity. I hate to say this but the Phillies would never do this. They had 1 Phanatic for years. Do they though? I feel like the "vet" the party patrol people at least a little bit. Granted they're all young adults for the most part, but I'm not really sure how you could know someone's gonna not be able to control their temper down the line. I guess the Mets could double or triple to salary and make it a career and hire a vet, but why? They've spread Mr. Met too thin by having him everywhere, hell you don't think there are pictures of Mr. Met doing rather stupid things at someone's corporate outing or smoking in his truck after/before a birthday party? Meh, it breaks the fourth wall for a moment while everyone gets their yuks in, and then it's business as usual. I mean, it's not like people stop taking their children to sesame place because an Elmo in Times Square sexually assaulted everyone woman that walked by. Or maybe they run with it. Have Mr. Met "go bad" for a few years. harass opposing fans, break things. Oversleep. And then in 2022 have a "Mr. Met apologizes" year where he's constantly out and about handing out goodies and making nice.

Stop with Rene Rivera already.

HahnSolo wrote: You are speculating that the balls he is reaching due to better range and then flubbing are turning hits into errors. Batmags--I think--is saying hold on, a fair official scorer would still classify those as hits and not errors. I get the argument that he will create more outs based on the numbers presented, but I don't think you can just assume that all his errors are due to the fact that he has better range and gets to more batted balls. We all know official scorers do not do that. If you don't touch it it's not an error. We need to assume Rosario has plus range, but it's based on a lot of scouting. We KNOW based on stats that Cabrera has poor to average range, and it's not an assumption that more outs are better, even if it comes with more errors.

Errors are garbage, that's why we're developing advanced fielding metrics, even if they're faulty too. Rosario has a 4.08 RF/9 in the minors, where there isn't a lot of data. Asdrubal Cabrera has a RF/9 of 3.72. 4.08 is higher than all the other PCL SS I checked. Obviously this could simply mean that Vegas pitchers let up more grounders than other teams. or the Majors. It's not a great comparison, but it's all we have. Scouting reports are also positive on his range/defense. So if he's covering 50 feet, and Cabrera is covering 45, any balls hit in those 5 feet that he gets to and flubs are hits turned into errors. You can trade too. Maybe he kicks a ball at his feet but makes two more plays in those +5 feet that Cabrera wouldn't have and now the Mets have more outs with Amed than Asdrubal even though Asdrubal didn't technically make an error. In simple terms, of every 100 balls hit between the range of the 2B and 3B, Rosario turns more of them into outs.

And official scorers award sacrifices for bunt-outs. And a flare that just happens to land behind the second baseman playing in is scored the same as a scorcher off the wall that careens right to the fielder. And a pitcher's ERA and FIP go down when Endy leaps over the fence to steal a home run. Few stats tell the whole story.

I wrote this before the 2012 season about why you'd want to watch a team you might think will suck. Who knows, maybe this is the year the Mets finally pitch that illusive no-hitter. Would you want to miss it because you have the Mets penciled in for last place and decided to spend your Saturday afternoon in June at the zoo?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm on "Team Later". Unless it looks like he might legitimately be the difference between making and missing the playoffs in 2017, I'd rather wait until 2018 to promote him. If they wait until shortly after 2018 begins, the Mets will have control of Rosario through the 2024 season. I know that nobody cares about 2024 right now, but we will some day. (And I'd estimate that that day will come in late 2023.) I don't see him as an impact player for this year. So let's wait. Might as well just shut him down and send him home then. Pick it up again next year.

Edgy MD wrote: Here's to sticking with relievers who are getting the job done. It's not just a necessity from when you are running low on arms, it's a strategy for when you are not. Worked for Davies.