Ceetar

but, it's not doable, MLB literally offering the same money each time, just demanding various amounts of work for it, and not negotiating in good faith.

A "Wall Street source following the sale" added: “I'm sure a bunch of people have voiced at least preliminary interest ... And maybe four or five of those people signed something to get more info on the team, but that doesn't make them a serious suitor.” well, sure, but that still makes them potential suitors no? It was a throwaway comment at an unrelated function in response to, literally, "Are the Mets for sale?" I think preliminary interest counts as far as judging the truthiness of this quote, which we're doing for some reason.

oka y, sure, i dunno, i was 4. but typically when you're that good in '84/'85, and still very good the following year, nobody's really souring on you. Yes it was obviously before Jordan but Sheffield wrote that this week, he's simply trying to explain who/what he was when it happened.

Gary Sheffield called him the "Michael Jordan of 1986" when talking about an incident when the police beat the shit out of them.

you buried the lead on that. My problem with Foley's was they never had a good beer selection (though granted it's been years since i've had a drink in the city so maybe they've updated). I do hope they find another place in NYC though, that post mentions he'd consider elsewhere.

scarlett johannsen

playoffs are currently canceled if they don't restart. Could just as easily be through the 'second wave' by the time mid-October/November rolls around as have it start then. Also cases are still kinda rising _right now_ so any sort of "gotta rush this season to make sure playoffs happen on the same timeline" is just random guesswork.

the season will not be extended in any way though, past the end of September, because the networks don't want to move playoff game dates.

well, it's not the planted a safe distance away that's the issue, it's when everyone's camped around the bathroom, or crammed into the stairwell breathing at each other. That doesn't happen at the store. Transmission isn't really happening by breathing while walking by someone in a store. And I certainly don't need food at a game enough to make the (probably under-compensated and under-trained) workers to cram into one of those booth in close quarters cooking hot dogs for me. But that extends to whether I can expect 30 guys to cram* into a clubhouse for my entertainment either. Some of this could happen with better testing and tracing, but it doesn't seem like we're really going that route. I'm okay with risk here and there, but so much of it's happening so carelessly. tl:dr I think there's a reasonable risk level that would allow some fans at some games, I don't believe that the US/MLB will be able to minimize risk to a reasonable level.

i mean, baseball _probably_ shouldn't open up, from a safety standpoint, and just to add fans to that (nothing will change from now until then, virus wise) is only going to be riskier. Even countries that have handled this not-horribly aren't seemingly sure about fans. KBO still playing with mannequins right? Going to a baseball game is a risk totally separate from the grocery store, running errands, moving around. We've botched this terribly and it's hard to see a way in which we execute fans in stadiums even with just slightly elevated risk.

=41Forever post_id=38508 time=1591797431 user_id=69] I guess it doesn't really matter, as season ticket holders are going to demand first rights, and they're going to demand the riff raff not be allowed in their section, and teams will go with that. Which means you need to keep the ushers at each section or a non-elite person might wander down into a season ticket holder's seat! So you could probably repurpose those ushers into some measure of crowd control/direction for exiting. Every game I've been to is the last couple of years has had ushers at the top of each section in the lower levels. I don't think it has anything to do with “elites.”

Frayed Knot wrote: There are probably minimal risks overall, but [there] are risks. As there are anytime one walks out their front door. not even close to the point. Benjamin Grimm wrote: People can be ushered out of the stadium one section at a time for each exit. Hopefully the fans would cooperate. Then you need additional ushers, crowd control. These things add more employees, and the more people you add to a situation, the riskier it becomes. I guess it doesn't really matter, as season ticket holders are going to demand first rights, and they're going to demand the riff raff not be allowed in their section, and teams will go with that. Which means you need to keep the ushers at each section or a non-elite person might wander down into a season ticket holder's seat! So you could probably repurpose those ushers into some measure of crowd control/direction for exiting. I'm not real hopeful they will do this right, or if they'll even try though. They'll probably just take 25% opening to mean let 10k people in and have like Alonso film a "wear your mask!" thing for the scoreboard.

it's not so much the point of sale as having a handful of the workers themselves together in the tighter quarters. other stores/locations aren't all exiting at once. I guess it could work if you only use the field level and only use the rotunda for an exit, where there's no looping in staircases. There's still likely cramping as you exit seating sections and outside bathrooms and the like. There are probably minimal risks overall, but they are risks.

oh absolutely they're waiting until the deal is in place before they try to get some of the "lost" revenue back. They don't actually care about employees, and vendors are barely employees (what's left of them) anyway, so I wouldn't be surprised to see canned/bottled/package stuff sold via vendor. of course, they have the tech to order via app and deliver to your seat, pre-paid. That would be the smart thing.

sure but they have to walk past each other. at best it'd be row per group and then skip a row. but still probably with concessions closed. and then you're still all walking in/out the same exits. I mean, it's doable in certain situations and states are opening up anyway because actually providing support for people is too foreign for them, so they'll probably with some suitable half-assed approach.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: And not all games will be played in empty stadiums. There won't be any crowds of 40,000, but I know that there are mayors and governors who said that they would allow paid spectators at sporting events. (I haven't been keeping track of which ones have said that.) If you could put 5,000 people in the park and charge them $100 per ticket (I'm totally making these numbers up) that would mitigate the $640,000 they owners will lose (using numbers that they probably totally made up) each game. I wouldn't go to a baseball game in these times if they paid me. And then fed me. I wouldn't be surprised if "tickets" are $200 a pop for your own section and include food/beverages (prepackaged stuff, they're not opening up teh whole stadium) that said, I would go to a game if it was affordable, but probably alone or with just one family member. Masks, stay outside, be prepared to leave early/in shifts. Mostly safe. I wonder what it'd be like. I'm not a vocal person, so I'm not gonna be the guy heckling and chanting lets go mets by myself. Will their be enough of a crowd to feel like a crowd? or will it just be like watching outside? Might be better off with the TV and my own deck then.

fyi, Blackstone owns 13% of the YES Network.

=ashie62 post_id=38367 time=1591644769 user_id=90] So, if they play a 76 game or about 1/2 season the players get 75% pay? MLBPA would have to be total idiots to not make this work

i mean, besides the team building aspect of it, like 99% of other complaints with the team would be ameliorated with a real fan board that was included in decision making. "What give aways should we have?" "Which music should we play?" "Who should we honor?" all that stuff. so yeah, I'm in for whatever my next stimulus check is.

deleted, but I think 'Bob Klapisch' was probably a good wood for it

I'm just not buying it is all. To your point, it looked for a while, until very recently, that the Wilpons would ultimately survive the Madoff devastation and get to hold onto the Mets for a very long time, especially when the value of the Mets increased into the billions. That's billions ... with an "s". But then the Wilpons were hit with two death blows, all within a year of each other. So, if you'll recall.... First, Saul Katz and the Katz family decided that they'd prefer to cash out their Mets holdings, rather than continue to part-own the Mets into the long term. And the Wilpons are too tapped out, too extended, to come up with the money needed to buy out the Katz family. And then this pandemic. the value of the Mets increasing doesn't actually get the Mets any more money (though I do believe it makes borrowing money easier) but yeah, the Katz thing. I don't (we don't) know the details of that exactly. Every moment they wake, normally, makes them more money, so you can't imagine them being in a dire hurry, until now anyway. Perfect storm (like an economic collapse the same time Maddoff gets caught at the same time you just financed a new stadium) So do they want out _now_? Hell, it looks like we're going to play. the Mets are good, a playoff berth and a few wins easily pays for just the loan payments, plus the projections for next year off a good run means more advertising money, more eyeballs, etc. better valuation, (bet the debt rating goes up) So i ask again, how desperate and serious are the Katz? Something doesn't add up here, which of course, why would it? all this financial stuff going on between (And not just the Mets) TV and stadium and personal and who knows what else is only one step above Maddoff anyway.

edited to add: This is specific to the _Wilpons_ ability to repay the loan, profit, etc. It doesn't change the loan amount one bit, and doesn't really affect the sale price. Those loan valuations will change as soon as the team is sold, based on the new owners finances. It's not that simple. The premise is that unless the Wilpons sell the Mets, they won't be able to generate the money to pay off their debt. Time is running out on them. we've been hearing that story for over a decade though, and we have even LESS insight into their finances now. I don't know exactly what this means: "S&P said it was also assigning a recovery rating of 1, reflecting an expectation for very high (90-100%; rounded estimate: 95%) recovery in the event of a default." I assume it means they'll go after Wilpon assets outside of baseball to recover the money? or perhaps they're just saying if they can't pay, they'll have to sell, and part of that sale will be paying the debt? But again,still above or at investment grade. So they must expect a payment this year. (or already got one?) And we're about to get a little more tangible info on their income for this year as it pertains to SNY/etc if games are going to happen, etc. I'm just not buying it is all.

I'm rooting for A-Rod right now. but I just don't care about the debt rating, and I don't think it has a ton of bearing, never did. I admit I'm not extremely well versed in it, but it's all tied into the creative accounting stuff that teams/debt does. I know, theoretically, that Forbes should have a good handle on it. Do they? does this writer? particularly as it pertains to something as singular as a baseball franchise? Particularly when the headline contradicts the article (it wasn't rated below investment grade, it was the "first step to being rated below investment grade", BBB->BB+ with next being BB? what does investment grade even mean? It seems like it means "more affected by adverse business conditions" which means.. I dunno, it's a fucking bank. They don't know the Wilpons finances, only how much they pay on the loan. So like, does this mean they don't pay as much back as they "should"? I just want facts and real information, not clickbait headlines and nonsense projection from it, that's all. I'm not sure this means anything and that it doesn't just go away the second it's confirmed normal 2021 with fans in the seats. edited to add: This is specific to the _Wilpons_ ability to repay the loan, profit, etc. It doesn't change the loan amount one bit, and doesn't really affect the sale price. Those loan valuations will change as soon as the team is sold, based on the new owners finances.

oh god debt grading. I think my eyes just glazed over thinking about it. I think that hammer/nail guy that used to write 3 times a day about how the Mets were going to lose the team in 2010 always got a lot of mileage off this stuff.

I was mostly just speaking to the 'Cy Quality' of his years more than trying to get in the voter's heads 10 years before I was born. If his win total sputtered in August in 1970, it makes sense to me that the voters decided he'd fumbled it away or whatever. You could probably make a case that final month performance IS more important (i'm not going to look up competing splits, it's 50 years ago) I just look at those years, and imagine that Seaver in today's game, and he's still elite with those numbers. (granted, he wouldn't have those numbers against modern hitters, but whatever) He was striking out as many as Syndergaard and Kershaw.