Elster88

]Slotted salaries are such an un-American notion that it makes me want to cry. Of course the other extreme gives you the Yankees.

Cliff Floyd Season ----- Games Played 1994 - 100 1995 - 029 1996 - 117 1997 - 061 1998 - 153 1999 - 069 2000 - 121 2001 - 149 2002 - 146 2003 - 108 2004 - 113 2005 - 150 2006 - 097 I love the guy but reality must be faced. In 13 seasons he's played 140 games or more 4 times. In 13 seasons he's played 120 games or more 5 times. In 13 seasons he's played 100 games or more 9 times. Thanks for the memories, Cornelius. See ya around.

SteveJRogers wrote: ="Yancy Street Gang"]I never subscribed to root for the team that beats you. A Cardinal victory won't reflect any glory on the Mets. And I have no allegience to the National League. In fact, except for in the years that the Yankees won the pennant, I think I've rooted for the AL team in every year since 1995. I'm for the Tigers this time around. But I don't think I'll be watching, except for perhaps a stray inning or two. (I'm not going to do my duty, Judy.) Apparantly you don't subscribe to the MFY fans and media rationale that glorified the fact that execpt for last season, every World Champion was either the Yankees or had to go through the Yanks to get to the championship since 1998 (and the 97 Indians even beat the Yanks on their way TO the series) All mocking of MFY hubris aside, that is a pretty neat bit of trivita though I've been an NL fan all my life, and actually have rooted for the NL pennant winner every year, even 1985 and 1988 (begrudgingly in 88) Just stop talking about the Yankees. Just don't do it.

Usually sometime in March the regular members go somewhere for food and drink in the city.

Yancy Street Gang wrote: I still have it on my TiVo. I've already burned NLDS Games 1 and 3 to DVD, and I plan on saving NLCS Games 4 and 6, and maybe 1. I've been iffy on Game 7. Classic game, but lacks a happy ending. If you still have Game 7, it'd definitely be worth the price of a DVD and shipping to me if you can burn it. And pick any beer from the I Love Beer thread at the March CPF party.

soupcan wrote: For posterity? Because you are a masochist? Or were you caught on camera? Excellent question. I've gotten the same reaction from a few of my buddies. Nope, I wasn't caught on camera. The main reason I want it is Endy's catch plus all the reaction shots of the crowd. The second reason is that I have all the other 6 games plus the 3 on DVD (my TiVo for some reason decided not to inform me that I would run out of room when I set it for yesterday's game), so I want it for posterity. The third reason is that I have just a strange desire to have it, despite the loss. The fourth reason is that I want to remember being there. On that third one, part of me wants it because of the loss for some reason. not sure what's wrong with me. Plus I absolutely love pre-game and post-game stuff when it includes the Mets.

Metirish, are you losing your marbles? The chant goes "Jose", not "Ole". They were taunting us. Fucking assholes.

If so, PLEASE let me borrow it to copy. If you have it on TiVO, PLEASE allow me to buy you a blank DVD or tape to make a copy. I'll also pay shipping and buy you a drink at the next CPF event. And if you were looking forward to smashing the tape into pieces, I can send it back to you after I make a copy.

]The higher odds I showed of scoring '2 or More' by NOT bunting is somewhat skewed because it includes the higher odds of the team having BIG innings - like 4 runs or more - which, in this case, wouldn't happen. What you really want to look at is the odds of scoring exactly 2 or 3 runs to either tie or win the game. This is incorrect. The numbers would not be skewed due to the game being ended at 3 runs. You should be looking at percentage chance of "scoring enough runs to win or tie the game". That includes scoring more than 3, because those scenarios win the game for the Mets. ---------- Other than that we made those two posts at the exact same time with basically the same thoughts.

I'd like to discuss the bunt play a little more. The stats someone posted somewhere (maybe the IGT) say that you: 1) score 2+ runs 42.5% of the time with 1st and 2nd, no out 2) score 2+ runs 41% of the time with 2nd and 3rd, one out. So the argument that the bunt is ONLY made to play for one run is blown to flaming dust right there. Looks like basically even money to score two. Then someone made the point that you're assuming the bunt works.....which is a good point......BUT.....you're also assuming the Cards execute the play with a rookie pitcher (who may not be used to fielding bunts), and a soaked ground, and an injured Scott Rolen who already threw one into the mezzanine. So I think the risk that comes from executing the bunt evens out, too. Maybe it's even in our favor given the factors above and (IIRC) AndyHandy is a heck of a bunter. Maybe he even beats it out. Then of course, you get a different type of at-bat out of Reyes and Lo Duca...all they need is a dinker to win the game....which Lo Duca is very good at doing. Hell maybe they even intentionally walk Reyes and the possibility of walking in a run with one out comes into play. ----------------- This is more of a theoretical application, not an attempt to bash Willie Big Balls. But the more I think of it...and throwing in Floyd's poor history of pinch hitting....the more I think the bunt was the right play. Edit: typo

]Bad job by both Cliff and Beltran not knowing that this kid will go to the hook with 2 strikes...he did it to Valentin just two days ago Come on. Let's have a clue here. Floyd got two fastballs at 1-2 before Wainwright threw the curveball. You don't predict pitches when you're hitting.

How'd batty get a custom designation?

What they said. I emphasized CF's new nickname for Willie b/c I'm using it in the thread title and don't want to take credit for it.

="Centerfield"]I did a 180 on Willie this postseason too. The only time I questioned him was his decision to start Perez over Trachsel and we all saw how that one panned out. I also like that he had the big balls to tell reporters "You guys are going to have plenty of chances to second guess me, I'm going on gut." Gutsy to start Perez, then leave him in to face Rolen. Gutsy to pinch hit Floyd and go for it all. From now on, he's Wild Willie Big Balls.

Vic Sage wrote: i've done a 180 on Willie, this series. I thought he did a great job. He let his hitters hit, and didn't give away outs with 1-run strategies. Unfortunately, the hitters who hit all year stopped hitting (except for Delgado and Green). He didn't have any better options on the bench for Valentin and Chavez, so their lack of production (along with Wright's paralysis) dragged down the bottom 1/2 of the lineup. When Reyes and Beltran hit at the top, we won... when they didn't, we lost. Willie also yanked his starters at the first HINT of trouble. He handled Maine especially well, i thought, and his use of the bullpen (overall, despite some quibbles) was good, too. His faith in Perez was apparently well placed. he stayed positive and focused and the team played well, despite the death of their lumber. Despite my whining all year about the starting pitching, it turned out to be the hitting that was our achilles heal. Valentin and Chavez came back to their career averages at the worst possible time, and the kids played like kids do when their under pressure. Only the Blue Jay contingent stepped up and played with assurance. Next year, we need another bat in the OF (and i don't want us to count on Milledge) and i don't want to rely on another miracle year from Valentin. Okay, Willie. I hereby retire "WWSB" (at least until you have beltran sacrifice bunt in the first inning next year).

Making the decision based on who beat the Yankees alarms me. Waaaaay too much concern about the Yankees in Met fans. I mean this as a generalism not about anyone here in particular.

I'm on the fence right now. I'm leaning towards the Cards because I'm sick and tired of "The AL is superior". And it'd be nice if the team that won 83 games in the NL beat the Tigers. I'm leaning towards the Tigers because I can't fucking stand La Russa, and Pooholes showed himself to be a prick. I can't take those two. And the Molina/Scioscia parallels make me want to vomit. I'm still glad I went yesterday, it was an amazing experience....but I'm heartbroken that I got the answer to one of my longtime questions: "What would've it been like to see 1988 NLCS Game 5 in person?" You know what, after writing it down, I'm going Tigers. And with all that said I probably won't watch until Game 6.

="MFS62"]="Elster88"] ="MFS62"] Perez was helped by telling him to go back to his old style of throwing (use the fastball more). I infer from this that somewhere along the line someone tried to adjust Perez's pitching style AFTER his 200 K in 170 IP season.If true, it's fucking amazing. From Doc to Perez, it's been 20 years of pitching coaches adjusting young phenom pitchers AWAY from what makes them great. Yep, from the stories we read when the Mets got Perez, that's exactly what happened. The Bucs tried to get him to throw more breaking pitches and take some speed off his fastball in order to improve his control. They felt he was throwing too many pitches at a young age and were fearful about the long term impact on his arm. Later So basically the same thing that f'ed up Doc (besides coke). Those pitching coaches surely are geniuses.

Edgy DC wrote: ="Elster88"]Edgy DC wrote: Perez was helped by telling him to go back to his old style of throwing (use the fastball more). No, Edgy DC did not. My apologies. When cutting text out after hitting the quote button on the first thread in this post, I kept your name as the quotee when it should've been 62.

Edgy DC wrote: Perez was helped by telling him to go back to his old style of throwing (use the fastball more). I infer from this that somewhere along the line someone tried to adjust Perez's pitching style AFTER his 200 K in 170 IP season. If true, it's fucking amazing. From Doc to Perez, it's been 20 years of pitching coaches adjusting young phenom pitchers AWAY from what makes them great. I wonder what Seattle's staff did to fuck up Felix Hernandez this year. PS: What's the plural of phenom? Phena? Phenoms?

]BTW, let's put a rest to the story that Perez was a throw-in. Minyana kept trying to wrest him from the Pirates, but they wanted Nady and Omar wouldn't trade Nady him one-for-one. Once Sanchez was hurt, Omar went back and asked them to throw in Bert to make the deal I never once heard the story described this way. Not even remotely. I can't take it just on your say-so. When and where did Omar say this?

SteveJRogers wrote: We lose this game, I am NEVER starting another internet IGT! ANYWHERE, any team, any forum! AND THE SILVER LINING HAS BEEN FOUND!!!!

A great game, despite the ending being wrong.

Great crowd. A classic game....can't even begin to describe seeing Endy's catch. In fact, I can't speak at all. Broken heart. Goodnight all. See you in April.