Ceetar

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I can hardly believe we are wasting so much energy on this question. It's obvious to everyone except maybe Ceetar that the Mets can't afford and won't allow that option to vest; that K-Rod is a douchebag; and that the Mets were retarded for ever giving out that deal in the first place. I just jumped in today, or yesterday, or whenever. I haven't commented on this thread since early March. Tell me where it's obvious that they can't afford his option vesting? Vague finance reports about the lawsuit by beat writers? Alderson said he hoped to have 2012 payroll somewhat lower than the ceiling, to provide flexibility. Well, I can't see that it'd be the end of the world if it were 6-7 million higher closer to that cap if he got a 17.5 boon of flexibility the following year. It boils down to his numbers though. I, as of right now, am going to trust him. If he feels they need the money by moving K-Rod, he will. If not, he won't. I don't root based on money. I root based on the name on the front of the jersey. so if K-Rod comes in the 5th, or the 9th, of a save situation or a blowout, i'm rooting for him to close out the inning cleanly. He's hardly the only douchebag in the game. That just doesn't factor in for me. I'd take Miguel Cabrera on the team right now, and I think what he did was worse.

duan wrote: the basic premise comes down to this. is there any reason why you should pay nearly as much as you would a top tier starter to a top tier reliever. if you agree with this what you're saying is you're valuing the leverage of the innings that a closer pitches at roughly 3 times the amount that you do a starter. Now, that's fine, but if it's the case you damn sure better be sure those innings mean something and you have a better chance of that happening if you've got a rotation rather then a relief corps. Dominant relievers are what a very good team need to put them over the top, not what a okay team needs to be good & therein the problem of the brittleness of the latter end of the Omar era mets, they needed everyone to be healthy to be good and whatever black cat he ran over sure as hell came back to bite his ass on that. I think the Mets could be classified as a good team needing to be put over the top with both the Santana and K-Rod moves. It was from there that he really failed, desperately trying to plug holes rather than work on building depth and backup plans with all the injuries. But regardless, i think the Mets problem has not been that they paid good players more than they're worth, ala K-Rod and Castillo, but that they paid some players and got virtually nothing out of them. Perez, Putz, Beltran, Reyesand to a lesser extent guys like GMJ and Francouer. Santana this year. The team needs to get better, and there are enough holes to target. If the Mets are in dire straits enough that they need to shuffle around players to create more funds, I don't know that they'lll have enough to make the team competitive anyway. After all, regardless of how much value K-Rod actually provides, getting rid of him is still going backwards to go further. Personally, I don't believe the Mets should, or need to, do that. I odn't believe there is a 2-3 year window before the Mets can be competitive, and that's part of the reason I'm not real concerned with his option vesting. I don't agree with the idea of paying a 80% guy half of that. (Even if we paid the replacement 8million, how sure are we that the 6million difference is going to make up that 20% value? It is only like half a WAR we're talking about here though. And where? ) I just have a problem with filling roster slots with subpar guys when better ones are available. If you can conclusively need that extra couple of million to say woo Cano over here (just picking a big hole and a big replacement for it) then I'm all for it, but I'm just not convincd that his contract is going to be what keeps Alderson from doing what he needs to.

Oh, I remember now. They were doing that thing where they were breaking down how long it takes for the player to field, and then how long to throw to first, versus the runners time down the line. via Aldrus's close 'safe' at the bag. Then they broke into discussion how the umpires are trained to watch for the foot and listen for the ball hit the glove. Bobby said they got the call right (graphic said it was .07s difference) despite the fact that sound travels slower than light.

metirish wrote: Ceetar wrote: I'm drawing a blank on the specifics now, but there was definitely a point where Bobby brought up physics and the other two were basically staring at him like he had two heads. I think Bobby was talking about the physics of giving fellatio to Cano around the second base bag. yeah, he lost me with the 1-2-3 step thing he was talking about regarding Cano.

I'm drawing a blank on the specifics now, but there was definitely a point where Bobby brought up physics and the other two were basically staring at him like he had two heads.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Additionally, it's that Overpaid K-Rod ramps up the odds significantly that guys like Reyes never get to become MarketValue Reyes in a Mets uni. I mean, there's no guarantee that you'll spend your tax refund check wisely, either, but wouldn't you rather have a bigger one with which to work? And that's where my disagreement is. I'm not convinced that it will. If it does, yes, ship him out. release him if they're out of it. Pull him with 2 outs and 2 strikes. I don't believe the union should be able to dictate in-game usage, and I'd be in favor of the Mets telling them to bugger off, we'll use our guys how we want. But this is not my decision. It's Alderson/Owner's. It's their job to figure out what they're going to need to spend on other parts, and if that 14mllion is desparately needed to keep Reyes and get another pitcher/OF/etc. Obviously him not vesting gives maximum flexibility and doesn't prevent them from resigning him from there either. But I just don't believe it's a big deal. Either A. The Mets need him not to vest, and in which case they'll make sure he doesn't. B. The Mets will be fine even if he vests, and having 17.5 million coming off the books in 2013 helps flexibility in that year too. C. The Mets are "in it" into September, and the added revenue from being in a pennant race and walk-up sales and next year projections based off that more than pays for Rodriguez if he ends up getting al ot of opportunity to close games in the persuit of staying in a pennant race.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: If you were Collins/Alderson, and you cared to acquire/plug in a demi-lefty-killing backup center fielder every 4-5 games, I'd be in favor of it. But who's that guy on the roster/system now? Hell, who's that guy in the league-- reasonably-priced CF backup who murders lefties-- now? Wanna put Matt Diaz in center? Overpay Cody Ross? As you point out, there aren't a ton of those guys available. It's not exactly 'killing' but Hairston has an .820 OPS against lefties and plays center. SLG .492. 27 homers in about a years worth of PA. He _is_ that guy, which is why they gave him a major league contract. Bay's injury and Harris' sort of hot start seems to have changed how Collins plays the outfield, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Hairston in center on Tuesday.

I state that he's better than he's shown in 16 games because his numbers are worse than all his numbers everywhere, and that he'll get at least one hit off a left-handed pitcher this year and I'm the one spinning things?

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: You could certainly point to his splits, but no matter how you spin his 1000+ AB with the Mets as 'flukish one season" he's not going to go the entire season without a hit against a lefthander. You're accusing someone else of spinning things here? Because no one's doing it?

Gwreck wrote: Gwreck wrote: Because he committed felonious assault in the workplace and he's a generally undesirable person to have around. I don't see what the first has to do with baseball, and I somehow doubt the second is true. The second is true because the first is true. There's a greater issue than baseball there; it goes to the nature of the employer-employee relationship. Rodriguez has proven himself to be a disruptive and insubordinate employee who committed a felony in the workplace. In the real world, if you do that at your job, you no longer get to work there anymore. --- Going back to your original question as to why the Mets don't work out a contract extension with Rodriguez, the answer is all of the above, plus the fact that any extension worked out with him would still probably be overpaying for the quality he brings to the team. Your comment that "the Mets are still better with a good closer than trying to replace him" is flawed because it fails to consider the potential lower cost of a replacement player of similar value. Lower cost relievers are not better relievers, they're just cheaper. We don't know that the 14million-newguy money is going to significantly make the team better, or that they desperately need it to fill all the holes and won't be able to do so without it. There's a chance that they fill it internally, but there is no telling if anyone will show themselves worthy of that either. I'd rather have the overpaid K-Rod for one year versus a less guy for 2 or 3. None of these are absolutes obviously, maybe they can sign a guy cheaply, maybe for only 1 year. It should all play in, but it's not a given that this team is better off without him. To the other point. Who knows. He's hardly the only guy employed in the world that's had a domestic dispute, even at work. And there are plenty of situations where they remain working where they're working, from favortism to money, such as this case. Just because the guy may not be the best human being doesn't mean that his teammates hate him or hate having him around. Josh Thole for example apparently likes him enough to talk him through setting up a Twitter account.

Gwreck wrote: Because he committed felonious assault in the workplace and he's a generally undesirable person to have around. I don't see what the first has to do with baseball, and I somehow doubt the second is true.

The Second Spitter wrote: 5b.The MFY may work-out an extension in lieu of the option making him their future closer with the final year(s) being backloaded, in effect deferring the high premium of the 2012 option. Why don't the Mets do this? I brought it up in the winter when there was nothing else to talk about.. I mean, The Mets are still better with a good closer than they are trying to replace him. It's not like he's old.

You could certainly point to his splits, but no matter how you spin his 1000+ AB with the Mets as 'flukish one season" he's not going to go the entire season without a hit against a lefthander. Although he's gotten on base 4 times in 17 AB. Of course, that sample size is basically worthless to draw any conclusions from. (Not that the 16 game sample is that much better) But he's way below even his Cubs numbers, so it's silly to think he won't do better than that, though I wish he wasn't bringing his troubles out to the field as they say. Wandy Rodriguez is a lefty, if Bay is back, maybe you let Hairston have a start in center and let Pagan have two days off. Also, why is Wandy Rodriguez a switch-hitter?

He's a good player (regardless of 'how good', he's better than this). I think he's pressing, and if Bay is indeed back I wouldn't be opposed to him sitting on Tuesday.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: weird goings on today: tv feed 5 secs ahead of radio. Gives Wayne more time to "describe" the play before it reaches the air.

Nymr83 wrote: Aggressive baserunning by Chip Hale, sending Thole home with 1 out. with 2 outs I think its automatic that you send him and with 0 outs you don't. 1 out is where Hale has a really tough decision (which he has to make instantly) and it worked out here! LGM! I like it, Heyward has a good arm and it took a good throw perfectly on-line, something that seems pretty rare even in the majors, to make it close.

metirish wrote: This is cool, playing catch with Braves fans during BP. http://www.twitvid.com/WGUVA Yeah good job by..Rubin?.. for thinking to tape it.

Gwreck wrote: Ceetar wrote: Even if the prices were "Shea level". Left out is that if prices were at that level, the unready rookies playing hard would be more common, because that's tens of millions of dollars less of income that the Mets would not have. Incorrect. 1. The Mets had plenty of income when they were at Shea; and 2. The new ballpark brings in tons of cash that is unrelated to regular seat prices. 1. Yes but costs have risen, and risen, and risen, across baseball. And it seems like they came pretty close to maxing out the payroll at Shea,( and they made millions and millions more than they would've had they not been closing it) trying to add that one piece that would get them that "1 more game" to get to the playoffs. 2. I think that's my point . $20 from Citi for example. The Mets operating budget is higher, and will always be higher, at Citi and because of it allows them not to become the Pittsburgh Pirates as they readjust the roster. It means they don't have to trade Reyes and Wright while they hope Davis and Thole and Haven and Flores etc come up and become stars worth putting pieces around.

soupcan wrote: dgwphotography wrote: if things get worse, perhaps this team can be ripped from the Wilponzi's cold, dead hands sooner. rather than later. I'm thinking that this may be the only possible positive outcome of this already lost season. it's not a positive outcome, it's simply an outcome who's worth is immeasurably at this time. Also, as dim as it looks, the season isn't over. No one will come to see unready rookies play hard. Even if the prices were "Shea level". Left out is that if prices were at that level, the unready rookies playing hard would be more common, because that's tens of millions of dollars less of income that the Mets would not have. No one's going to come and watch Mejia get shelled just because he's young, throws hard, and a couple of people say he reminds them of Gooden. If 'falsely completing' were going to trick this front office into believe it's better than it is, then it's not really a very good front office. The team sucking just means they're further from the goal of ever being watchable. Johan coming back would go a long way towards figuring out what we're going to get of him next year. If we wait until next year, we don't know if we're going to get a resemblance to Johan, or Chien Ming Wang. If it's believed that the Madoff situation prevents the Mets from spending what they need to improve the team _and_ they sell, K-Rod's option becomes less important. a new owner should be one that's going to spend the money to improve the team, and an overpaid, but still one of the best relievers in the game, is still a better asset over picking one of the middling relievers in the system/team and making them the closer. In general closers are overrated, but getting rid of one of the better relievers only makes the team worse. And working as a unit, or good enough to win right now aside, this team has talented players. Blowing it up and hoping the next crop of guys comes in and does well and whatever is basically the Pirates model, and doesn't work.

Young officially DL'd with the right bicep tendinitis (retroactive to I believe 4/9, which means eligible to return 4/26, Tuesday in Washington) Misch recalled. not announced as Sundays starter. Still TBA, i imagine they're still considering Gee and Misch is just Carrasco depth.

Also, I'll be at Hurricanes in Levittown for the end of game 1, so when they win, someone else start an IGT for #2.

42 - Reyes - SS 42 -Pagan - CF 42 -Wright - 3B 42 -Beltran - RF 42 -Davis - 1B 42 -Harris - LF 42 -Emaus - 2B 42 -Thole - C 42 -Carrasco - RHP Young also wrote an 80 page thesis on Jackie Robinson. But probably won't get to play in this one. Kenny Rogers record is safe.

The Second Spitter wrote: It's easier just to treat tweets for what they are... Trash mostly. They met with Young because they have a pitching conundrum exasperated by the doubleheader. While meeting with Young can 'sound bad' it can always sound like they're actually think ahead this year and are trying to plan out the pitching for all three games with what roster moves they need to make. Young's health plays a large role into that decision making, so not having him and the trainer there would be sloppy. Young was quoted in Popper's article saying that it's gotten better each day so that makes them think it's not serious.

Gwreck wrote: Ceetar wrote: Popper's is the key there. "no word", "no comment". I understand it's their job to try to tell us what's going to happen, but this is how unfounded rumors start and get spread. Someone follows that up with "guess Young's going on the DL" and ESPN orLoudmouths or radio host say Young won't start on Sunday. There's nothing wrong with what Popper said. Anyone with basic reading comprehension skills can figure out what was said by the Mets and what Popper is interpreting. Your scenarios of the hypothetical person then choosing to make further comment reflects poorly on that hypothetical person and not on what was actually written. Your beef is not with the beat writer here. Not solely, no. But this is why I unfollowed Rubin, because the needless and worthless opinion, laced with negativity, was not worth the facts that would trickle out anyway. Do I need the beat writers to tell me what Young meeting with that group means? It too often feels like they're trying to tell me what to think, that this team is sucky, will always have bad luck, will continue to suck, etc. Also don't need that underlying story line, and i could do without jokes about Misch being "close to Atlanta, maybe he's in a secret bunker with Cheney?"

The Second Spitter wrote: Anybody know who's pitching first today, DJ or Pie Chucker? DJ first. 42 in the first game. Fox in the first game. They do need to hold to the same standards, imo. Do they just say "Not a journalist right now...blah blah blah" and get away with it? no. Popper posts a story with a tweet saying "Young may go to the DL" but all the quotes point to uncertainty, that it's getting better but they're not sure how it'll feel when he actually pitches and how long he could last if it's lingering. That's part of the equation. Add in that it's not likely that they would DL him, probably choosing instead to ditch the 13th reliever after the doubleheader for Gee and then Gee for the bench guy or Bay. If Young still can't go next week, then you DL him and bring Gee right back. (Bring him with the team to NY, it's on the way back to Buffalo anyway)