Ceetar

Edgy MD wrote: It's a doubleheader. Evahbody plays. wait, everyone? shoot, I better get out there.

Obivously B. That's a different question though. I wouldn't wager my hand that a shadow team doing the exact same with choice A wouldn't end up being the better team.

I'm not willfully reading a hack if I can help it. Google says Marinak's from Virginia Beach and 2 years younger than David Wright.

anything interesting/quotable? I try not to click on Sherman links.

seawolf17 wrote: There's an interesting piece in that old thread, about Jay being excellent at *media relations* but not necessarily other stuff. I worked with a media relations person who was a nightmare to everyone, but did a great job at getting the right press coverage. So maybe that's a thing. yeah is job is to manage the relationship between the team and the media, provide access, releases, etc. Not really to interface with the public and spin stories. So he's basically doing the same thing except instead of media it's guys that were previously on the other side of it with him.

because it's fundamentally wrong on a season to season basis. Like, how much does Jacob deGrom make? How much does Yu Darvish make? How much does David Wright make? Shohei Ohtani? The best players in baseball are rarely the ones being paid the most money. The Giants have the ~2nd highest payroll They're 68-78. On the talent, they don't have an advantage against roughly anyone. The Rays have roughly the lowest 25 man payroll, but they're the 5th? best team in the AL. Just strictly on "who's going to win games this year?" PECOTA projected the Giants and Rays to be roughly the same. The Mets could give say, Alex Rodriguez 102 million dollars to play third next year, and they'd have the highest payroll and still not have an advantage over most teams. The Angels payroll ,according to https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/, is roughly the same as the Yankees. Does that mean they're roughly equivalent? What did the Nationals get out of their high payroll this year? average stuff? Despite the second best pitcher in baseball? If the Mets and the Nats played each other 162 times, would there be a meaningful advantage to the Nationals? probably not. to sum up, Payroll size is a symptom of a good team, but it's not the cause of a good team. It's like pitcher's wins. Typically a good pitcher will rack up a lot of them, but it's not always true, and it's not really measuring what we want to measure.

Centerfield wrote: Do you believe that a team with a higher payroll is at an advantage when it comes to winning in the regular season? *Note that I am not asking if higher payroll guarantees anything, nor am I asking if higher payroll is more important than any other factor. Just simply, do you think it's an advantage or not. in any given season? no.

Centerfield wrote: You said you want to watch Mets baseball, do you also want the Mets to win? I mean, yes, that's more fun.

I always answer honestly.

"The total size of the payroll is so divorced from my enjoyment" is neither twisted logic, or logically unjustified. It's subjective and an opinion.

Centerfield wrote: There is a large contingent of fans that, despite wanting to win, are completely indifferent to whether or not the Mets spend like a big market club. I'm indifferent because I want to watch Mets baseball and how much they spend is so divorced from my enjoyment that it's hard to care much. I want them to bring in the right players, and it's not always straight cash. In fact it's rarely cash. It's evaluating needs and which players aren't going to break and a lot of luck involved in those too. I mean, I wanted the Mets to sign Yu Darvish, and I was skeptical about spending money on Arrieta. But the better move very well might've been Jhoulys Chacin. There was vicious attacks launched at the Mets for choosing Vargas over Arrieta or Darvish, for not winning the Ohtani sweepstakes, but no one even mentions Chacin, who costs the same as Vargas. (no one mentions the lefty aspect of Vargas, though I wonder if that played in) There's also the knowledge that teams that spend 'like a big market club' still do usually end up in a rebuild process when those mistakes they overpay for build up. You sign Darvish and he breaks and is added to the Cespedes and Wright contracts, and suddenly any owner is questioning spending more money that's going to get exponentially more expensive at the cap for possibly limited return is worth it, and then you're staring a rebuild in the face. Like going forward, the Mets should spend for Machado, it's a highly logical way to go, though it does require a few pivots with guys like Frazier. There ARE other avenues to success though, and if the Mets bring in players that I think will be fun to watch and give this team good chances to win, I'm going to enjoy 2019.

Edgy MD wrote: What would ceetar do if the word "garbage" was suddenly unavailable? confuse you with synonyms.

smg58 wrote: I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. But it's possible that we get to the end of next spring and it's really obvious that Alonso is your best option at first right now. There is zero chance meaningless spring training games can make that obvious. It's just garbage time. It doesn't mean anything. Flores is slighly above average, so even if Alonso was magically going to be a 6 win player (unlikely) missing most of April, less than 1/6th the season, won't even cost you one win.

Scott Kingery of the Phillies made the team out of Spring Training.. ...but he signed a long term contract to do so.

d'Kong76 wrote: Craig Calcaterra wrote: Everyone would like to win, but if you’re not gonna win, raking in revenue while not spending much of it on baseball players is considered a very, very noble thing. If you can do it without catching hell, all the better. This is like some 'some fans are from Venus and some are from Mars' kinda moment or something? I'd like to hear from just one fan that finds nobility in losing while still turning a good buck off it for Joe Ownerpants. not 'fans'. That's rich people inner circle stuff. All 30* owners would love the attention and praise that comes with winning, but all 30 would take regular profits every year over a guaranteed win this season. ALL OF THEM. These guys probably had a party when the government cut taxes and high-fived. They sing the praises of their slave labor minor league and 6 year service time agreements any chance they get. The whole lot of them. Angry Mets fans rant about MLB forcing the Wilpons out, but the entire league probably felt more sympathy for them than you feel for your coworker when he takes a week off cause his father died. It's why this second half is kinda important to the Mets. Them making the case for being within a reasonable shot is what will convince the Wilpons to go for it, as the expected return on going from average to reliably good is worth the investment. We just need someone in the interview to make that case, and to point out how a team meandering around .500 is going to be forced into overpaying long term for Thor, deGrom, etc without noticeable gain unless they invest everywhere. It's pretty obvious that they, and we, are not going to have a complete rebuild, and that they're going to have to continue to throw good money after bad year after year unless they bulk up now. And i truly believe there are guys out there that are going to make that case, make it convincingly, and get hired.

man, Bruce is garbage at first (and in the outfield) and I'd hate for them to do it, but you probably get the best return trading Alonso and just rolling with that. or someone else (David Wright?)

does minority owner Jeff Wilpon get a say? I thought those were non-voting shares. i kid. but you know what would help this 'disagreement'? bringing in a few of each 'type' and interviewing them, and then getting together as a group and choosing one. My money's on that happening.

well, eventually. EVENTUALLY. the area around Citi will be 'cool'. Ish at least. They've leveled the chop shops at least. it's only a matter of time before we have an Applebees and a generic irish bar right? Or like, a good bar/grill and some cool stuff? We've got a brewery. great start.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Wild speculation but CitiField being a completely artificial, manufactured, made for TV place where the fans aren't even trusted to enjoy themselves without prompting from the PA is somehow to blame. Fucking Billy Joel singalongs! Also maybe the twin ugly scoreboards, which aren't even twins, plays a role as Roessler mentioned. Yeah but then it wouldn't be even near the worst, given places like the Coliseum and Citizen's Bank Ballpark.

All teams justify their signing and give AB to guys they're committed to. It's not productive to piss off Bruce by half-benching him. Jackson and Reyes though, even Flores, fuck 'em. I want Smith to play mostly every day going forward, but like, he needs to walk. He looked like he was doing it early on in the Minors, but since his first call-up when he basically didn't, he went back down and basically didn't, and has only walked once in the majors in his recent returns. And that was Ball-Ball-Ball-called strike-ball, which I could probably look at the actual pitch location but was probably not close with bases empty, down 6-0, and Tomas Nido on deck.

I like how Verducci also draws the exact opposite conclusion he should. He seems to think the Mets shouldn't be signing slow fly-ball guys despite the numbers suggesting that quick ground-ball guys that generally rely on BABIP for value WOULD BE HAVING THEIR NUMBERS SUPRESSED by the park. In fact, If Citi Field is making defense easier, it validates in a way Alderson's decision to poo-poo defense.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: I don't know why we're mostly ignoring 2009-2012 (because it refutes Verducci's point a bit probably). More likely because Citi's outfield walls were moved in after 2012. The original dimensions were so drastically different than the current dimensions that 2009-12 was essentially a different stadium. it wasn't _that_ drastic, and regardless I'm not sure how that would affect disparate BABIP.

I don't know why we're mostly ignoring 2009-2012 (because it refutes Verducci's point a bit probably) But 2013+ Mets BABIP at Citi is .270. The Nationals is .280. Marlins somehow is .324? ATL and PHI at .310 and .311. There doesn't seem to be anything here. The Nats in 2015 were particularly bad at this, but even 9 games is really a tiny sample and more to do with the Mets beating them than luck. The Mets individual seasons since 2013 all are clumped inthe middle. 2013 was the Mets worst BABIP season by sOPS where they were 91% as good as the league at BABIP in Citi Field. 2016 was the best where they wre 108% as good as the league at Citi Field.

Fans want him to come back at home (because they think they're watching a swan song, and the Mets/Wright aren't looking at it that way) but they kinda should just do that. Even if they just announce that it'll be a PH on Wednesday or like he'll play 3 innings. Then he can DH in Boston, which is roughly the same as a simulated game but you gotta run a little if you hit it.

Ceetar wrote: maybe. Seems outlandish given how it'd fit into the budget just fine. Insurance trumps cheapness every time. 'Fit into budget,' lol. Like any fan has a clue of what the budget really is.What's outlandish is everything Wilpon.