Ceetar

It's going to be inevitable. Runner on second 1 out, bottom nine, tie game. fly ball to center field that's called an out. runner retreats from near third back to second. replay indicates it was a fair ball. You could give the guy one base, but chances are the game should've been over. But then, it's one of those things to argue about.

Frayed Knot wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: I guess that even if a ball is called foul by the umpire, you have to play it like it's fair, just in case. That's not going to happen. I don't see any way to keep players on both sides from reacting to the call as it's made, at which point it's left to the umps with the task of pretending to know how things would have occurred had the correct call been made initially. Can't. Say the RF dives for the ball and it's ruled a catch. David Wright turned second has to retreat to first, he can't go to third pretending it's fair, because if the rulings upheld he's thrown out at first. The RF dove to his right, so if it's a fair/trapped ball, he easily jogs into third and should probably be awarded it on the replay, but he can't go to third on the hopes it's fair. conversely, he can't pretend it's foul/caught either. That would mean retreating to first, where presumably Davis behind him is standing, because he's certainly not going to stand at home waiting to see the ruling. Now you've got guys crossing each other on the base paths. And you certainly can't stop play at the time of the ruling. So you're going to have to come up with very specific cases and what happens for each, and drill it into the umpires. Understanding that the players response is often a result of the umpires call. In my example above, just about every player is going to third. But say Ike Davis shouldn't be penalized for being on the first base side of second base when the call is make because he's slower and allows himself less space in case he needs to get back. Similarly on tag-up plays.

btw, apparently Verabschiedung is German for adoption.

we're talking backup here, or simply the 'next' guy that will squat in a Mets uniform that isn't Thole? I'm going with 'in the system' either way I think.

Here's what I'm wondering about the new setup: If two teams finish in a tie for first place, previously there was little practical difference between being the division champ and the wild card, so they had the various off-field tiebreakers (head-to-head, common opponents, etc.) But now there's going to be a significant difference, the exemption from that one do-or-die game. I would think that ties for division leads should now be broken by a playoff game, to be played before the do-or-die game, but I haven't heard anything about whether that will be the case. yeah, was curious about that myself. Not sure I've got a preference though. If the Phillies go 6-12 against the Mets but they tie for the division lead, why should they play one more game, full of randomness, to try to determine what those 18 games already suggests. Also like to know if home field goes to the team with the best record (exempting WS) or does the division winner get precedence?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Exactly. Which is why it's entirely possible that Valdespin and Nikeas and Niewendiwesis (or whatever the hell his name is) may have more reason to hope to be in Flushing than they normally would. Nieuwenhuis. Better start practicing. Alderson said he expects him to need about a half season in the minors. (Of course, they said the same thing about Ike in '09. ) DePodesta mentioned him in August last year as a guy that probably would've gotten a callup if he hadn't gotten hurt. So seems like they're pretty much in agreement that he's on the cusp. I think it's a reasonable theory to have him pushing Torres to roving 4th OF by June. I heard somewhere that the Mets had considered Alex Gonzalez, and I suspect we'll see some randomly blaise veteran SS guy show up. I guess Turner can stand there in a pinch, but I'm not sure Tejada's good enough to chisel in for 160 games there anyway so probably want a real backup.

gave it 2.5. It wasn't bad, although very stereotypical and predictable. Definitely had some funny/ridiculous moments though, and was very watchable.

Dmhudgens wrote: @redturn2 you make a great elf.... @dmhudgens thanks Hudge! My trip in AZ was a lot shorter then expected sorry we couldn't get together! Hit for the 1st time with Murph 2day! Dmhudgens wrote: @redturn2 Awesome JT, really looking forward to ST, it will be here before we know it.... @dmhudgens ya it's always a good feeling getting back on the field for the first time! Enjoy your holidays! Is anyone surprised that Murphy and Turner found time to take some swings the second they saw Citi Field?

watching it right now. They just failed to get to Vegas. I'm..I dunno, mildly entertained? Granted, I'm photoshopping little kids into a bowl of M & Ms while I'm watching, so I'm only giving it like 77% attention.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Maybe it's just Sir Salderson managing expectations... and maybe it's him honestly conveying his own. Sandy Alderson acknowledged the Mets need starting rotation insurance, in part because there's no absolute assurance Johan Santana will be ready in April. yeah, I think it's just prudence. I don't think there will be any particular..news.. on that front until early February or whenever it is he actually starts doing things with that shoulder in prep for ST. But it's a good idea to get a 6th and 7th starter anyway. Niese has shown a tendency to be a little achy as well.

love that it's because he'd forgotten he slept with the girl already. I don't get how this is why it came to light. It seems to imply that she was pissed, but it's not like she didn't realize who he was. She could've walked out and still exposed the story, but clearly she slept with him again. Unless he's selling each girl on the "You're so special, here's some stuff" but he's not even presenting it himself!

metirish wrote: Edgy DC wrote: David Wright's eyes just lit up. He's always hit Willis, hasn't he? Will Willis see the rotation? numbers Nice Numbers be shocked if he does. Although he did have a 'bounceback' year last year with the reds, almost got his WHIP down to Oliver Perez ranges. The worst part about that bat_vs_pitcher list is that b-r still considers Jose Reyes a 'current Met'.

Edgy DC wrote: David Wright's eyes just lit up. He's always hit Willis, hasn't he? does he own a bat? he does? then yes, he hits Willis.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Are we really OK with Nickeas as No. 2? Not really. I hope there's some other plan. Lucas May, Kai Gronauer? Or you know, Thole. Perhaps it's a sink or swim type deal for him. He plays 140+ and sees if he can truly, really, be an everyday catcher. (probably would be my guess, even if he's not going to be great) If you're set on not platooning, wouldn't the preference in a backup be a defensive whiz, not a lefty-masher? (Not that Paulino is necessarily that either, .752 against lefties last year. He just wasn't good)

I took a shot of my Citi Field yesterday, forgot to upload it though. it's a wee bit diff.

metirish wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm amazed that I was able to win this one year. I have no idea what either "meter" or "scansion" are. I don't think I've ever even heard the word ""scansion". I feel a whole lot better knowing that Grim never heard the word either. That's a mansion infested with scabies right?

and it really seems like the quickest path to success is hoping the Wilpons get it together.

TransMonk wrote: It's time for the Wilpons to just admit defeat. well, they're clearly not doing that. They're not even going all-in, saying 'fuck it', keeping Reyes, and trying to turn it around fast and be profitable. It's almost like they're trying not to lose, which doesn't seem to bode well for the short term. They've cut payroll enough that they'll probably only lose like 50 mill this year if they have a similar record, and they can probably sustain that another 3-4 seasons at least.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: who would lend these guys money anymore? the Mets? a lot of people. Despite 'losing money' the team still generates a ton of revenue. And they're not going to be contracted. Even if the Wilpons eventually go under.. wouldn't the Mets still owe the money? and Bank of America may be one of the first paid..ahead of say David Wright..

Frayed Knot wrote: - Braun requested a second test which reportedly came up clean although it's not clear what the time gap between that second sample and the first one is as that's something that clearly can affect the results. It's well into the offseason too, so no surprise if it didn't come up clear right now.

http://adayolderadaywiser.blogspot.com/

I can't see Justin Turner gifting Scotch. He'd presumably trend towards a more Irish Whiskey like Jameson. And he appears to be crushing that Johnny Walker in his iron grip.

Can't find any pictures from the wedding, although Justin Turner was there.

Vic Sage wrote: now if we get Dotel, too, we can have the ENTIRE bluejays bullpen. which is better than what we had last year, at any rate. I'm ok with: -Francisco / Rauch -Ramirez -Beato -Acosta -Byrdak -[6th starter / long reliever] now just get a backup catcher, backup IFer, 6th starter and lets get ready for another sub .500 season. I'm thinking Parnell will be in there and Beato won't. Herrera maybe? also, I'd probably release Carrasco but if not I imagine he's sorta a contracted and will be in there type guy. Stinson kind of impressed in September last year. Perhaps he's a candidate.

Didn't catch it, not much interest in listening to a Rocker interview anyway, but that's certainly an interesting tidbit. Truth? How did that not get out? Or was it just that once baseball starting saying they cared about steroids he was already out of the league?