Ceetar

seawolf17 wrote: and the home run he gave up to ol' whatshisname as an O. This is it. oh, and "home run" best case for replay I've ever heard.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I have no problem with taking a flyer on a guy like him. My issue is that it's using up $7.25 million of the offseason budget. It remains to be seen how much that will handcuff the Mets from any future moves, but right now that's where my concern is. I mean, no one's aware of the budget more than the guys that signed him. They have a plan and he fit into it. It's not like they're walking down aisles "Ooh, Chris Young, put him in the cart!" and then get to the Granderson aisle and realize they can't afford it. The interesting part is they insinuated to him that he might play CF. If anything, that indicates that we could see TWO more outfielders, not just pencil in Lagares as 2014's Rey Ordonez.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I kinda feel about Chris Young the way I did about Xavier Nady and also, Ryan Church. You know, a newly arriving, young-ish vet, corner outfielder who might be good. Or, might not. It's impossible to tell. Chris Young is way better than those guys (although I still believe Church would've turned in some good years sans-concussion)

Edgy MD wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: 2) ... even though it's true that those players don't get any greater with an extra year of sitting on their ass, is ultimately harmless in the long run. I'd say it's largely harmless. Not completely. Here's a thought, say they punish Piazza for his era/acne and it takes him 10 years to get in. That's 2023. He retired in 2007 and if you want 'true Piazza' you gotta go back a little further. Anyone that saw him play even close to in his prime will be approaching 30. (an aside here, in that it kind of makes sense. I'm 31 and it's only just recently that I've seen more than one or two electees play) Isn't there value in letting the kid that was 10 when Piazza played in the World Series and became a Mets/baseball fan because of it get to celebrate it while they're still younger, perhaps when they're at a time when other interests might take them away from baseball? When you take a 8, 10, 12 year old kid to the museum, doesn't it lose some appeal when everyone is "This guy was great...before you were born" 5 years feels like a good time to allow the legacy to settle, but then put the guys in so we can celebrate them. Part of baseball has always been debate and arguing over who's better. This guy played in that era, this one didn't face segregation, this guy had a larger pitchers mound, this guy took steroids.. It is what it is. Baseball has rules. In the end, the stats and records stand based on those rules, and inventing reasons why you think they shouldn't count, or count less, is absurd.

Edgy MD wrote: You mostly have me until here, Ceet. I have no problem with the body proclaiming themselves the ultimate judge of guilt. They are, after all, asked to be the ultimate judge on everything about these careers. What I have a problem with is the lazy way they exercised their judgment, lumping in with admitted users the likes of Piazza and Bagwell and Biggio and Raines, which to me represents a pretty steep slide downwards in the realm of incriminating evidence. Raines is a perfect example of a player who may miss out entirely based largely on this deliberate logjam. This is, what, his seventh ballot? if they want to be judges, they need hard and fast laws. That means if you haven't turned conclusive evidence in the FIVE YEARS since the player retired, you have to work with what you've got. No "well, let's see if he admits it in the book" nonsense. That's absurd. It's a yes or no question, you've got his stats and records and all that, and no evidence to support not putting him in. I think it's absurd to keep Bonds (and Clemens) out, but if you want to go that route, even without the actual 'failed test' stuff, I can at least understand the logic and reasoning.And sure, Sosa, McGuire (and none of this 'oh, he admitted it so I'll forgive him' nonsense either.

d'Arnaud all the way. Delve into some of those advanced catcher/framing stats and pick the backup that's good at that. (Trav is pretty good at that apparently, so might as well be consistent)

See, here's the thing, FK: when you limit the voting body to "working beat writers," you limit the electors to a group of people who likely watch LESS baseball-- and certainly less out-of-market baseball-- than your average analyst/blogger/involved fan, who can watch 5-10 games a night, and follow the relevant game-to-game stats as they happen, all while the beat writer watches his one game a night. These days, access begets less actual access, and-- apparently-- far less circumspection. except the vote's not limited to 'working beat writers' but 'guys who at have at least at one point in the near or distant past been working beat writers' meaning there are golf writers voting on the HoF and guys that have admittedly not watched much baseball. You can argue some based on what you think the Hall is for I guess, but to me it's an extension of the sport and a way to continue to celebrate the greatest players. Sure, some people might not make the cut for greatest in some eyes, but they're still certainly very good players that shouldn't be forgotten. To misconstrue very good players as great once in a while is a minor sin compared to giving us nothing to celebrate at all in a given year for BS reasons like proclaiming yourself the moral authority and ultimate judge of guilt. All those things are absurd. So is sending in blank ballots to purposely discount other peoples vote. I mean, last year would've been a spectacle. It probably would've set records in attendance. And that's just for Piazza, a New York legend, not including all the Giants fans in the area and right or wrong, the Bonds drama.

Chris Young is 41/96 qualifying OFers over the last three years in terms of fWAR.

Frayed Knot wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Meanwhile Deadspin has gone to great lengths [crossout]to empower fans[/crossout] [crossout]to subvert the process[/crossout] [crossout]to make a point that needs making[/crossout] do something. Not that I think their idea is all that subversive and needs to be stopped immediately, but they seem to be basing it all on the idea that the results have become "increasingly absurd" and that it's largely due to the votes being given to "a random subset" of writers. I don't always agree with the results either but I'm not buying their premise here. I absolutely buy the premise, but then I don't particularly care about the writers "great players" club much anymore. We'll see if that changes this year.

Jeff Bagwell Craig Biggio Barry Bonds Roger Clemens Greg Maddux Edgar Martinez Mike Piazza Curt Schilling Sammy Sosa Frank Thomas

None. screw 'em all, steroid cheating bastards, every last one of them.

Lefty Specialist wrote: "It is high, It is far ..... It is..... GONE! It's another McCannon shot! Oh Brian, you've got them cryin!!!!" I think this is closest. It's only a matter of time before the McCannon is a marketing tie-in with McDonalds.

Edgy MD wrote: "It is high, It is far ..... OH, YES..... HE..... McCANN! I'm sorry... I'm sorry. The ballgirl down the leftfield line picked it up. She's flipping it to a fan." "And now McCann is screaming at the fan, because he's fist-pumping and waving the ball around." "That's pathetic Jon. That fan really should act like he's been there before. It's a good thing dear ole Brian is here to set him right."

Agee?

Roger Cedeno

Edgy MD wrote: Steve put "plan" and "direction" in quotes. If this guy is neither the plan or direction, I'm not sure what to believe now. stupid Mets should've given up Noah for him.

Edgy MD wrote: We all know that there's no indication that Alderson has looked at this guy at all, right? We know that this is only here because I posted in response to a late night weekend report in which Rubin quotes a neutral party saying this guy might be somebody the Mets would be interested in, right? Rubin's infallible. I'm pretty sure Decker's already scored an invite to Alderson's Thanksgiving dinner.

I like Aoki enough, sure. Norichika has a nice sound to it too.

SteveJRogers wrote: I can't wait for this conversation to be in late January again discussing "talent" to fill out the AAA roster, rather than before Thanksgiving/Winter Meetings for filling in major holes on the team. you choose the conversations you participate in. Sure, it's easy to spin it as filling a major hole and they're broke and this is all they'll do, or you can choose to see it as a depth signing. Or simply how Alderson probably sees it, a guy who's available and might be useful in some capacity. The toolbox of players to fill rosters can never be too full. All 30 teams make meaningless acquisitions and signings of these types of guys all offseason long.

smg58 wrote: The career OPS+ of 114 is below the other available outfielders, most of whom are younger, and that's before you factor PEDs into the equation. That's also Lucas Duda's career OPS+...and we've already pointed out that Duda's probably not much worse if he is worse in the outfield.

Memory of David Freese

Robin Ventura

R.A. Dickey

Mike Hampton

minimum 250IP pitcher or no? cause, Matt Harvey.