Ceetar

Niese 148 last year, 18 so far this year. Wright 161 last year, 20 so far this year.

soupcan wrote: Yeah sure it's free and it doesn't hurt anyone. Ceetar reminds me of me as a Mets fan circa 1979-80. I would look at the fact that Mark Bomback had won 22 games in AAA and thought 'HA! Just wait till HE shows 'em what he can do..!' And I can appreciate what you say Ceetar, but being 'in it' doesn't count. They're bad, they're losing. Whether it be 5-4 or 6-1. A loss is a loss is a loss. I don't mean to deride, I'm just frustrated and I want everyone else to be pissed off too. I'm not saying I'm not frustrated and pissed off. But I don't want to be. And I get annoyed when people tell me Blah blah it'll never get better. I can watch baseball that's meaningless anywhere, so if I'm not going to root for the Mets to succeed, at whatever odds, to me it's just not worth the effort. It may be a long shot for Niese to step up and strike out 200, but I'm rooting for the long shot. Worse is people telling me that I shouldn't get upset when the Mets lose because they suck. That's irrelevant. "Miracles" happen all the time in sports, and imo, rooting for one is almost what being a fanatical fan is about. Everyone is getting on the Mets and killing them. So why can't I look for the silver lining and think about why it could happen that way? I understand they suck, and are sucking, and look like they want to suck forever. But I'd rather root for the signs of hope rather than proclaiming Pagan will bat .180 or David Wright will strike out more than Niese. (Actually, I think that would bea decent "Who has more" question)

soupcan wrote: Ceetar wrote: I'll be there tonight myself. Gonna whip them into shape. They've looked worse the last couple of days, but maybe teams just look worse when they're not hitting versus not pitching. I know you pride yourself on being 'optimistic', but dude they are bad all around and they are not getting better anytime soon. well, they're going to get _better_..that's almost inevitable. Just shear luck will do that, but so will adding Jason Bay. I just meant that there were some games against the Nationals and the Rockies where they seemed to be leading and playing better for 7 or 8 of the innings and just blew it. The last 4-5 games though they've mostly been bad all around, all game, with small exceptions. Even Sunday they only scored 3 runs and barely hung on.

I'll be there tonight myself. Gonna whip them into shape. They've looked worse the last couple of days, but maybe teams just look worse when they're not hitting versus not pitching.

TransMonk wrote: The Mets now have the worst record in baseball. From what I've seen so far, I think the record fits the team. I think they're unlikely to win 48 games or be the worst team in baseball.

Frayed Knot wrote: I didn't have a problem with the relief choice, though did with the PH choice. Two-on/two-out/down-two in the 7th could be your last best chance to get some runs and opting for Hu there over Muffy wasn't the way to go IMO. That smells of either over-playing lefty/righty or because he wanted to save him for later on, a later on which turned out not to matter. I just had this thought, what if not PHing Murphy there was a sort of punishment for the baserunning blunders? there was enough lefty/righty/getHuAB stuff to justify it I suppose, even if I don't agree.

Edgy DC wrote: bmfc1 wrote: Terry's better PH, Murphy, and better RP, Isringhausen, didn't get in the game and the players that were used didn't come through. Sometimes you shouldn't save your "bullets" for later in the game. Well, I have no problem with Isringhauesen staying out. I'd've like to have seen Murphy. But I think he's trying to get Hu some opportunity to get going. I just like attacking the starting pitcher until he's walking to the dugout. It's a big part of winning to me. I agree with that. Was it because it was lefty-lefty? There are other opportunities to get Hu AB and playing time if need be. I don't know what suddenly happened to all the offense.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: I believe these are irrevocable waivers; if a team claims him, they've got him (under the same Rule V conditions with which the Mets were dealing), with no "pullbacks." (Think Texas and Darren O'Day.) If nobody wants him, then he's offered back to the Jays for $25K. They can also work out a trade if they'd like to hold onto him; then and only then is the Rule V condition set gone. irrevocable. that makes sense.

Here's my confusing rules question. Say they decide to pull Emaus back off waivers. Can they do that? And if they can, does that cancel the rule 5 status? Because Toronto only gets him if he clears, but if he can be pulled back, he can't be placed on again. The Mets would I suppose have to outright release him to get rid of him at that point. At which point anyone could sign him as he'd basically become a free agent right? And if that's the case, can they release him instead of waivers to begin with? and if they do, can they then resign him immediately to a minor league deal? What am I missing? Or is the process of putting a rule 5 guy through waivers different?

TransMonk wrote: FC E4 5U Don't see that too often. definitely! is it 5u or 4-5? or as Ted Berg said, 4-6ish-5?

Bourn CF, Sanchez SS, Pence RF, Lee LF, Johnson 3B, Hall 2B, Wallace 1B, Towles C, Rodriguez P

Centerfield wrote: Hi! I'm Justin Turner. I'm betting that if the news had not broken, and I had shown up tonight wearing Brad Emaus's uniform, none of you losers would have noticed the difference. Hey now, I would've noticed! I saw you drinking wine with Scott Hairston and Kai Gronauer in Spring Training! Please don't hit like Brad Emaus btw.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: I like him, too. But it doesn't matter what he's done in Buffalo this year... because, unless he's changed his batting stance to a one-legged heron-fu thing, it's a tiny-ass, not-terribly-indicative sample size. he's hitting .300 with some XBH, so if he's doing it one-legged heron-fu style, he's gonna get a lot of people into the stands to check that out!

smg58 wrote: If you had sufficient confidence in Emaus to hand him the starting job out of spring training, then two weeks should not have been enough time to change your mind. That being said, I hope Turner gives out team a boost. What's done is done. I don't know that they had sufficient confidence in Emaus to begin with. They just didn't have greater confidence in Murphy and Turner was easily optioned. I like Turner though. maybe if whatshisface had promoted and started him a little bit more last year, we'd have had a better idea of what he's worth.

Florida is not a long flight, and the plane tickets are not going to make much of a difference in the Wilpons' overhead. Actually they sent him back by bus to save costs: The Apple

metirish wrote: Ashie62 wrote: I would have preferred they just keep Bay in NY rather than fly him to Florida to play two games. not finding much sense in that myself , could he not get the same swings in maybe with simulated pitching here in NY? I think real life games are important. We saw what happened when Beltran and Castillo came back too fast after the break last year. or Reyes with no Spring.

Edgy DC wrote: Bay getting his seasoning in St. Loo, going 1-5 in his first two games back. He's expected to put in two more and return to the team Thursday. Nixed in Buffalo because they didn't want to subject him to cold. which is probably good, because it snowed there today and the game was canceled.

Gwreck wrote: Leadoff walk + Carlos Gomez bunt + throwing error by Kyle Kendrick + Ryan Braun now up = Brewers should be taking a lead very soon in the top of the 12th. ballgame over, Brewers win.

G-Fafif wrote: Eight years of following every utterance Darryl Strawberry made and the only time I ever heard him say anything remotely related to baseball, not just himself, was when he dismissed the notion he would hold against newly acquired Jeff Musselman the incident in which the then-Blue Jay hit him in Spring Training and Straw went after him. "You don't do that to a teammate," Straw said, and I thought, "Wow, I never heard Darryl hold forth on baseball etiquette or baseball anything before." Probably knew more than he was letting on. Probably knows more now than we could possibly imagine. I'm waiting for his Canseco-level expose on the late 90s Yankees.

TransMonk wrote: Unfortunately, with K-Rod the debate goes beyond baseball skills and financial options. I think even if Frankie was the best closer in baseball (which he is not) and Sandy worked out a steal of a deal on an extension (which I doubt he would be able to do), Alderson would be run out of town because the majority of the fanbase dislikes K-Rod so much for his off the filed incident. I think they cut and run from K-Rod as soon as the first opportunity presents itself. I don't see many possibilities where K-Rod wears a Mets uni in 2012. It's certainly possible, but it's one thing to cite fan opinion to ditch Castillo, although so far I'm kinda wishing they hadn't, quite another to actively avoid keeping a contributing player because of it.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: You're the one talking about "all the surplus" for a financially strapped team. was tongue in cheek to the stupid give Frankie 100 million comment. no one knows how much money they're going to spend next year, and certainly no one here knows better than Alderson.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Ceetar wrote: I wouldn't be surprised of Alderson approaches Frankie's agent later in the year and proposes an extension at current rate in lieu of the extension. then you get the player, AND 5-6million dollars of additional working money. "Honey, look-- if we buy two more timeshares, we get them for 40% off each! Think of how much we'll save!" That doesn't even make sense.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: The Mets will be fine even if [K-Rod] vests, and having 17.5 million coming off the books in 2013 helps flexibility in that year too.. Why don't the Mets guarantee K-Rod a hundred million dollars for next season? Because, think of all the money that'll then come off payroll for 2013. And us fans won't have to worry about the number of games K-Rod finishes this season. I don't really care what they do with their extra money. If they fill all the other holes and then want to give Frankie all the surplus, fine by me. Would seem a little stupid, but sure.. I wouldn't be surprised of Alderson approaches Frankie's agent later in the year and proposes an extension at current rate in lieu of the extension. then you get the player, AND 5-6million dollars of additional working money.

Gwreck wrote: After all, regardless of how much value K-Rod actually provides, getting rid of him is still going backwards to go further. It's difficult to locate logic in this sentence. I think this argument fails in that it incorrectly presumes that removing Rodriguez from the Mets automatically makes them a weaker team. Also: The Yankees hold options on Robinson Cano for both the 2012 and 2013 seasons at $14 and $15 million, respectively. Sorry if i bundled the wording, trying to type in this box in IE is infuriating. It's hard to see how removing one of better relievers in the game from a team does not make them worse. It most certainly does. the team is going to have a closer, so if you remove him, it's one more piece Alderson has to acquire. You may get a little more money, but you also get a longer shopping list.