Ceetar

rumors of two years, which seems to be contrary what we've been told Alderson would be willing to do.

TransMonk wrote: Sterling Equities wrote: the New York Mets will have all the necessary financial and operational resources to fully compete and win I wonder exactly what they mean by "compete" and by "win". As do i. I mean, they've repeatedly stated that it won't affect the Mets. They also said that anyone they interviewed for GM that said the Mets weren't that far from competing wasn't going to get the job. So, if they're entirely truthful, they realize they need to spend. Yet Sandy is repeatedly quoted implying that the Mets have a hard budget that they're almost up against. So which is it? Someone ask Sandy.

Suppose this works, but don't like the suspension. It's been all downhill since we signed cheating Mota

And remember, that sign is good luck. I got a job while standing outside Coors field before taking it, and a couple of beers afterwards. Good luck for Francis as well, who continued rehabbing whatever injury it was, got back on the field, and made it through to the end of the season.

Got a picture of Jeff running a mile high on my blog, which I'd paste here if I could connect with something other than my phone

metirish wrote: I wonder if reading that book now for the first time seven years after it came out makes a difference in how one would think about it. Without a doubt.

I just finished the book. I enjoyed it, but its hardly a how to guide on the best way to do things. One part I found the interesting was that the wait for the three run homer philosophy that's often applied to money ball was probably a result of an ignorant comment by joe morgan during the playoff broadcast.

hehe.. yeah, the Nationals are wise to make a push to be at least interesting in the immediate future with Baltimore sucking. Try to steal some fans for real. Even in NY there is a large contingency that jumps back and forth, and I Orioles fans don't have 50 years worth of animosity or anything. Being interesting will draw them fans. Of course, they still suck and will probably finish last unless Hanley or Josh Johnson gets hurt, but whatsever.

Edgy DC wrote: Mike Silva is pushing Roy Merritt, a Rule V-eligible 25-year-old lefty who held lefty batters to a .228 average in 2010, mostly at Bingo. granted we could protect him, but they haven't, so it's silly to pencil in him for a job no? When's the rule 5 draft?

It's not like they're equal 'gutshot' guys. closer evaluation may suggest Young has a better shot of contributing anything.

I can no longer remember if Manuel referring to any situation in the bullpen in any other way than "We gotta have our eighth inning guy."

Edgy DC wrote: I think any plan would include working with him on getting the walks down to a manageable level. If he continues to be terrible, there are few roles to target for him. The idea is to achieve redemption and what the best path to it is. I think it's square peg/round hole to get him to walk few enough batters where bringing him to face situational guys with runners likely already on base is going to be successful. If we can get his walks down that much, succesfully, I very much believe he could be one of the best pitchers in the game.

metsguyinmichigan wrote: I think he almost has to say some things about the past because the team is making a big show about how the new regime will do things differently. While they can't help idiots like Jeff Pearlman taking cheap shots at them, as he did again this week, they're going for total image makeover. To do that you need to show what will be different, at least during the off season. Once the season start, winning commands a little more respect than the talk. He did say, and specifically mentioned Jerry here, that he wasn't going to talk about the past in spring training with the players. That previously they'd gotten too hung up on correcting what went wrong the previous year. He also mentioned David Wright in this regard in responding and adjusting to the lack of power in 2009.

pass. if we could _teach_ Perez, we'd have no problems anyway. that .214 batting average against was actually a .411 OBP against, and a .863 OPS against last year. Too many walks. If he's going to have any success its' not going to be in short roles with runners on base. I could see him being the versatile reliever. bring him in for an inning, where he may walk some guys but will also get them out. even if it takes 30 pitches. or can come in and throw 3 innings if a starter gets knocked out early or labors. spot starter if double-headers stack up or something.

metirish wrote: Not sure I at all like a new manager dissing an old one . I didn't read it like Jerry inferring everything Willie did was wrong, more like he was suggesting that the 'other' (Boras) people in Ollie's life had more influence on his decisions. He talked a lot about "process" and going about things the right way.

I was a little disturbed that he kept referring to his "intenseness" Not as disturbed as I was at the questions propagating the negative and false stereotypes about the Mets and some of the players. And I turned it off for 'singing'. I think Collins hinted that one of the reasons Perez didn't go down is because he didn't respect Manuel enough to believe he had his best interests in mind.

Ceetar wrote: Didn't the Brewers sign ....... to a 10 year deal? or at least a really long one? why can't I remember his name? Braun. 8 years actually. and when I searched for his contract i found this thread about a random Gammons rumor about trading him. Mimics the Reyes rumors in a lot of ways. http://brewersfandemonium.yuku.com/topic/23685/t/Brewers-may-shop-Braun-Gammons-says-he-s-hearing-so.html?page=1

Didn't the Brewers sign ....... to a 10 year deal? or at least a really long one? why can't I remember his name?

I'm going to Red Sox vs. Braves on 3/16, Universal Studio on 3/17, and then catching both home Mets games the 18th and 19th.

At least we know Adam Rubin can read. http://www.springtrainingonline.com/features/master-schedule.htm

Edgy DC wrote: And he made it clear that the issue was in part that it was a scoreless inning streak against Mexican League batters, and he wasn't so much opining on his own behalf, but speaking on behalf of what scouts, the Mets, and the questioner was concerned with. The fastball looking good, the changing speeds, setting up batters, etc. All more important than the velocity, and I think the K-rate and the swinging strike rate are more representative of whether he'll be successful again than a gun reading. But if he's hitting spiking to 91-92, frequently, that does speak to building arm strength and getting up there more consistantly, something Warthen and Manuel rarely let him do. (pulling him early in spring training games even) but Ollie's problem has always been consistency. can he repeat that d elivery to consistantly throw 92? Or is he goign to follow up a 80mph changeup with a poor throw that becomes an 88mph fastball and doesn't quite have the mph difference to be as effective? Also, I've never seen a real answer to the question of what he's throwing. gameday and fangraphs and whatnot were classifying some of his 87ish pitches as cutters, and his 91ish as fastballs. is he tricking the system with bad mechanics? (which, if it's the case, makes me extremely skeptical of that data in any analysis at all) or is he actually trying to throw a different pitch?

Edgy DC wrote: Adam Rubin wrote: Just got this from a person familiar with Ollie's winter-ball activity, since obviously velocity is more important than a scoreless-inning streak against Mexican Winter League batters. "Early velocties were 87-89, with an occasional 90 mph, all out of the pen. Starting velocity ... consistent 88 mph, but spikes are higher and more common. They are seeing occasional 91, 92." Did he really say that? Velocity is more important than a scoreless-inning streak? Sure Adam, I don't care if Ollie gets anyone out. if he throws 95 he can have a spot in the rotation no matter the result.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: 50-50 chance. I voted for it being Wilson on the right because I seem to recall him looking rather boyish. I hereby identify myself! I had the same thought.

Who of 2010 is a sure thing in the bullpen for 2011. Parnell? Gonna be a lot of new faces.

metirish wrote: Feliciano has officialy declined arbitration from the Mets....per various tweets aww.