Ceetar

Mets � Willets Point wrote: Ceetar wrote: It's entertainment, so I still was hoping for the "I enjoyed it" aspect, but not at the expense of the "profoundly disturbed" aspect. Movies very often feel to bridge that gap. They should've hired David Lynch to direct. Well, I don't think they even wanted to hit on the disturbing aspect. Just the way it was marketed and people are talking about it seems like it was basically a money-grab directed at the Twilight crowd. And Twilight was initially pitched as "the next Harry Potter" (which is the only reason I read it)

Edgy DC wrote: Yeah, the old "medium negates the message" issue is always there with me. That was a point made in the Vulture review I posted above, that it whitewashed some/most of the horror out of it. It's entertainment, so I still was hoping for the "I enjoyed it" aspect, but not at the expense of the "profoundly disturbed" aspect. Movies very often feel to bridge that gap.

m.e.t.b.o.t. wrote: [crossout]m.e.t.b.o.t. is ready.[/crossout] m.e.t.b.o.t. has sent a pm to human ottoneu commissioner ceetar you can change the team name at the very top of the screen if Fman's human anatomy allusions confuse you.

Vic Sage wrote: well, kids read 1984 too. Um, yeah, Ceetar, they do... because its one of the great works of English literature and most important statements about politics, language and society in the 20th century. Not just cuz it's a good read. as for THE HUNGER GAMES... well, the jury is going to be out for a few decades to determine whether its literature that should be studied in its own right. As for what its saying that's relevant to teach socio-politically (saying what hasn't already been said by dozens of other better books about dystopias), that's what i'm asking about. I suspect the answer is "well, its like 1984!", to which i say, "then read 1984." I suspect the Hunger Games, whether or not it's socio-political statement is compatible with the one taken from 1984, is eminently more relatedable to by today's youth than 1984. Ultimately the lesson comes from the teacher, not from the book. The book is merely a tool. So if a teacher feels the lesson can be taught similarly with a modern book, and one that's popular to boot, why not? Not only that, but having to re-apply the message to a different book reinforces the meaning to the teacher as well. Instead of teaching something that he or she learned by rote and has repeated for years.. Personally, I like the Hunger Games better than 1984, but I should reserve that until I finish the series. It just feels like a deeper story, but then it's much longer too. I only read 1984 a couple of years ago for the first time though, and I don't know if I remember much more than I'd already gleaned from it's immersion in popular culture. (Big Brother, always at war with Eurasia, etc)

metsmarathon wrote: wait... i'd have to shell out another $10 for this wouldn't i? no. you can claim abandoned teams for free (we'd time it so I'd click the abandon button while you were around to claim it) m.e.t.b.o.t. would be playing on Fman's dime.

well, kids read 1984 too. That's the parallel i keep drawing. Again i'm only 56% through the series so I'm surely missing some of the overall 'meaning' but it's not a light read or a fluff book in any sense. And it's very well written. I haven't been following the hype too closely because I only just started reading it Friday, but I think there's definitely something to the female protagonist thing and that she isn't written into one of the typical female stereotypes (which is in part because there characters are well written, so they have real depth) It's a post-apocalyptic world where the 13 districts rose up against an oppressive capital. They lost. As punishment the Capital razed the 13th district, and instituted the Hunger Games which is basically real world Survivor, where they fight to the death and one person wins. two people from each district, which are now walled-off states without any interaction between them, are chosen via random lottery. Kids can put their names in multiple times to get a ration of bread for their family. (so rich people have one entry, poor people have dozens) The Hunger Games are mandatory celebration. They have to watch in the town square. The winner is paraded around the country and rewarded with riches and fame. Each district is rife with poverty, generally the higher number the worse it is. Katniss's father was killed in a mine accident when she was 12 (mining is District 12's contribution to the economy. But he Capital controls said economy, so even if the district's thing is harvesting, doesn't mean they get to eat) and her mother went catatonic with grief, so it fell to her to feed her mother, herself and her younger sister. She nearly starves, but eventually learns to sneak out of the district to hunt in the woods, and is able to barter with what she gets. The Capital is always spying, has peacekeepers stationed in the district, and has wealth and food and all that. To them, the Hunger Games is actually just Survivor. it's a TV show and they wager on the victors and celebrate them and pick favorite players, etc. Then when she's 16 her 12 year old sister's name gets called, and she volunteers to replace her. Her actions inside the arena basically spark the beginnings of a revolution by giving people hope, and this gets her in trouble with the president. I presume an overall revolution is where the series is headed. (unlike 1984 where the government basically strikes him down)

Very well could've been a Pagan for Ramirez thing (although that's overpaying on our part) with Torres as the "well, you don't have room for him and now we need a CF" guy instead of a prospect or something. I get the sense that the organization feels pretty good about Nieuwenhuis showing up sooner rather than later.

Vic Sage wrote: yeah, great thinking it was too. Vlad averaged .320/30hr/100rbi over the next 6 years with the Angels, with only the last season spent as a DH. And yet these days Alderson is praised for being reluctant to give out contracts like that. "One year too many" type deals. Granted Vlad is better than ..well, he's better than most everyone, but don't we laugh at the Werth and Holliday deals? The Howard extension? Sometimes it works out though. also: Roy Oswalt.

This is the review that resonated with my take of it. http://www.vulture.com/2012/03/movie-review-the-hunger-games.html Definitely not missing anything by waiting for Netflix/Cable if you haven't read the book (which I highly recommend). I'm a sucker for wanting to see good books envisioned on the screen even though I know they're never as good. (The Twilight movies are better than the books imo, which says a lot about how bad the books are) I'm already looking forward to the second one though, it's got a very strong 1984 vibe to it so far in the book.

.265/.340/.410 19 SB, 3 HR. Becomes a very good 4th OFer in July for Kirk Nieuwenhuis in center.

You know the "hottest" movie of the year? The book is amazing. I'm into the second now, and it's just as good. The movie..well, the movie imo was a letdown. It's not that it's bad, it's that it missed all the opportunities to be great. It's not a 'feel good' book, but the movie misses most of of the horror involved with 24 kids being forced to fight to the death in an arena on live national television by an oppressive government. The story is about a future North American nation of a Capital region and 12 (formerly 13) tightly controlled fenced in districts. Each District, as a rememberence of rebellion, is forced to offer up 1 boy and 1 girl for Tribute to fight to the death in the yearly television show, The Hunger Games. Which is also mandatory viewing and supposed to be celebrated. The story follows Katniss, the tribute from District 12, one of the poorest districts, in her quest to survive and the trouble she causes the Capital in the process.

as a fill-in guy who knows if Duquette even had any real sway to kill him for. He seems okay on the radio. Also, credit him (and Omar/Sandy for keeping them) with hiring Ben Baumer and founding the Mets statistical dept.

I'll create a fake account to grab some players in FA if that's what we decide to do. If I claim it to a fake account it opens up that account if any CPF member wants to join the league next year. I feel bad for the random guy that claimed the team, but whatever. screw him right?

Kazmir ultimately did blow out, just took longer than was worth worrying about. That's the risk. Maybe Duquette, as more of a sabr guy, fell prey to the "There is no such thing as a pitching prospect" meme. Back may have been a small concern, but it was probably just something to use as an excuse for .. i dunno, not raising payroll, not signing that long a contract..who knows. I don't know why you'd ask the same guy. I imagine Peterson was at least one of the guys anti-Kazmir, as pitching mechanics as they pertain to injuries was pretty much what he did. He probably also noted that Zambrano had something fundamentally wrong that when fixed would've hopefully yielded better results, of course it seems like what was wrong was because he was injured. Remember the days when Mets went whole seasons hiding injuries and we didn't even know it?

metsmarathon wrote: yeah. it would be different if someone had chosen to run their draft that way. i think the best would be to retain fman's players for whoever picks up his team after the conclusion of the draft. So Jason Bay and Hanley Ramirez. just so we're clear what this guy gets. :-D

A guy claimed the abandoned Fman team. Do we let him draft, perhaps monopolizing the guys we want because of his higher cash holdings or block/abandon him and just run the league with 11 and an unqualified team until next year? We can also just block him from the draft temporarily and then let the random riff raff take the team and try to piece it together via free agency. I think that's a poor option though, might as well create a fake fangraphs account to squat the team and maybe try to recruit someone else next year. or we can tie Fman in a chair in front of a computer. Who's closest to Syracuse?

TransMonk wrote: i'm going to have a hard enough time sneaking bargains pas the lot of you all. but a guy with a full wallet - sheesh! This. But whatevs. I blame Fman and his lack of patience. He hasn't gotten back to me. I mean, if you we think it's really better we can just boot him at 8:30, release his players, let Fman's team just be unqualified all season until someone picks it up again. Maybe that's the way to go.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: When you're more optimistic than Ceetar, there's cause for alarm. Santana is Santana of old, just through 30 starts instead of 33. Jason Bay sticks to his old swing, re-finds his stroke, and hits 30 home runs. Frank Francisco and Jon Rauch both pitch more good than bad, and Acosta and Ramirez remain very good. Jon Niese, Ruben Tejada, Lucas Duda, Ike Davis and even Dillon Gee and Josh Thole take small but steady steps forward in their growth. That team could win 97 games. Would any of those things happen really surprise you? Would you really say "Never in a million years would I have thought Bay would hit 30 home runs again"? Obviously these things don't always all happen, but neither does one make the other one less likely to happen.

some powerful stuff here, an excerpt: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/baseball/mlb/03/26/dickey.excerpt/index.html

just some guy to ostracize. Ottoneu seems to be anti-having less than 12. If we really don't like the guy we can throw him back, but the team would then be available for anyone to claim again. the auction shouldn't b e that big a deal. He's flush with cash but he's not gonna have access to like the top 150 guys or so either.

Edgy DC wrote: I don't like to get into specifics. It'll be a positive, positive year. Many steps forward. Many enemies vanquished. Put a number on it!

smg58 wrote: 8:30 tonight? Is FMan back in, and if not, are his players going back on the market? shoved a replacement player in there. As long as he can make the draft. Guy's clearly going to be at a disadvantage since we already drafted Duda, but I imagine he can cobble together a non-embarrassing team. 8:45 I think I said in the email. Clearly if everyone's there we can start. If anyone thinks they are going to be late, or just doesn't care if we start without them? (I mean, you'll only miss a couple of players, many of you don't really need that many)

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I've had it up to here with the way relievers are used what with the closer schmoser and the this guy gets the last inning and I know so two and a half weeks ahead of time no matter who's batting and what's on base so I'm not gonna make any predictions, 'specially about a pitcher who accumulates seasons 40 innings at a time. It's alright, we won't punish you (much) if you guess wrong.

metirish wrote: Edgy DC wrote: Biggest game of the year and Acosta on for the save. in a must win game? games 163/WC game. Frank Frank blew it in the 9th, Acosta in in the 19th.

86 pitches for Santana. one more start, probably 95-100, then hanging out with me next Thursday!