Elster88

HAIL

Bret Sabermetric wrote: No, they did dump Seo to AAA because he had a good month, though. He's not a current Met, of course, because AAA apparently wasn't far enough. I agree with you there. They took a dump on Seo.

I don't get it. Is there a current Met who got dumped to AAA because of one bad month?

Your post has new ones that I like. Not being a thread cop but pointing you to the ones on the other page that you might not have seen. There's a message on that thread from the real Chuck about the WWCND site, too.

Bret Sabermetric wrote: In mid-summer 1986, I was fearful that Foster might NOT be released, and I was pissed that the Mets were keeping this over-the-hill slugger they had paid big bux for. I wanted Foster swapped out ((I still think they hung onto him too long, to the point that he had little trade value, which was my chief complaint about Piazza, if you're scoring) but at least they had the guts to pull the trigger when he gave them a damned good reason to let him go. This team regards over-the-hill vets as absurdly valuable, and it hurts them, and will hurt them in the future. This current club seems to think that money spent needs to be justified, whether it's justifiable or not. The DJ Mets were all about winning, not about CYA. I'm glad they got rid of him too, but I think more of it was due to his dickheadedness. If he was a nice guy, do you think they would've been as quick to drop him? Bret Sabermetric wrote: But this is only what I liked about those Mets. Christ's sake, I open the floor to ask what other people like about those Mets, you read my post closely to figure out my "agenda" here, raise all sorts of objections to my thesis, and forget the purpose of this thread: to discuss what YOU love about the Davey Johnson Mets. Do you like arguing my thesis more than you loved the Davey Johnson Mets? I'll admit that my first thought was, "He's only talking up the '86 Mets as a not-so-subtle way to bash the current Mets." I still think that was part of the reason you started this thread. If I'm totally off the mark then I apologize.

http://cybermessageboard.ehost.com/getalife/viewtopic.php?t=109&start=140

]Now if Seo and Heilman turn out to be as good, you can argue (and probably will) that they were good BECAUSE they were brought along slowly, being yoyoed back and forth helped keep the pressure off them, etc. and I can't prove that you're wrong, either. And if they each stink up the joint in 2006, you'll be able to say, "See? If the Mets would have started them as rotation anchors in 2005, the team would have been even worse than it was." Leaving out the points for the moment, don't tell me what I will and won't say. Because not only are you completely wrong, but that's just being a dickhead. Secondly, what in the world are you talking about? I can't be proved wrong? What is that? The only thing that I'm really arguing is that Heilman and Seo aren't as good as the other three. That can't be proved wrong or right? The contentions that are unprovable are mostly yours, the ones that Heilman and Seo would've been treated better with Davey Johnson at the helm. What you don't seem to realize is that they really have been given opportunities to play. I think Seo got shafted too, but everyone has an orgasm over his performance last year and conveniently forgets his shitty 2004. Heilman also underperformed until last year, where the majority of his success came in the bullpen. When Sid, Doc, and Darling were given similar chances, they performed well, and thus they stayed in the rotation. Edit: Again, let me express my love for Davey Johnson. But how did those Red teams he managed do? When he wasn't given a world of talent to manage, how did he do? And I'm sure you realize his Met teams actually played below their talent level. Edit 2: Toned down the hostility, to curtail my own dickheadedness.

HAIL

] I didn't say Davey insisted on playing only the youngest players on the basis of their youth, and disregarded veterans on the basis on their experience, though if you want to argue against those positions you can twist around my words and look very clever doing so. I didn't say you said this either. I'm not arguing for or against those positions. I'm actually not even sure what you mean by arguing against those positions. All I said was that Davey played the players he was given. ]I can't believe revisionism has advanced so far as to make Doc G at age 19 a no-brainer. That was the single gutsiest move that I've ever seen a first-time manager make, and KC is all "Whats the big whoop? He was Doc Gooden, it was totally obvious" about it. I agree with KC. Everybody wet themselves when they saw Doc pitch. I'm pretty sure most other managers at the time would've put him in the majors. ]totally genius, is what it was totally, and it took sheer balls to get it done at point before age 22 or so. I know they aren't pitchers, but Wright and Reyes were pretty young when they first started playing for the Mets. Of course, the current Mets were forced into that right? Otherwise, they would've never dreamed of putting those two young guys into the majors. It still blows me away that a continuing argument against the Mets is that they ignore the younger players. Then how in the hell did we have a starting lineup that included four position players under the age of 24 last year? Dumb luck I guess. ]That you're giving Davey no credit blows me away. No other manager would have stuck Darling or Fernandez in the rotation either llike Davey did--they would have dicked them around, yoyoed them between AAA and the majors, jerked them in and out of the rotation--just look at Aaron Heilman and Jae Seo if you want examples of what other people might have done with their younger starting pitchers. Davey just said, "These guys can pitch," and he pitched them, for which he gets a lot of credit from me. If you're comparing Seo and Heilman to Doc, Darling, and Sid.....I just don't know how to argue with you. It seems to me, by the above paragraph, that you're saying Davey would've given Seo and Heilman more starts because he did so with the three 1986ers you mentioned. That's a very, very shaky assumption, considering how much better Doc, Darling and Sid were. I'd argue this: Since Heilman and Seo don't have nearly the same amount of talent, there is no guarantee they would've gotten more time under Davey.

HOLY SHIT!!! IT'S DARRYL! FUCK! I HAD NO IDEA! WHAT'S HE DOING AT THE CARAVAN!??!?!?!?! I AM COMPLETLY AND UTTERLY SHOCKED!!!!! I have to go lie down.

Spacemans Bong wrote: He knew how to use a computer before 99% of the population - he was building computers in his home in the early 70s, IIRC. I love dopey, made-up statistics like this. They crack me up. So...Spaceman, what percentage of the population used computers in the early seventies? How many homes had a computer? How many people knew how to use a computer?

Davey was ballsy. He only started the young guys instead of the vets. Or wait, was it Ray Knight or Howard Johnson that started at third? Oh shoot, maybe he was just lucky to get one more good season out of Knight. Left field then, yeah. He would never wait until George Foster shot himself in the foot a dozen different times by calling Davey a racist and his refusing to take part in team brawls. I mean, Davey would have never started an aging crusty veteran on the downturn of his career, he would have put a younger rising star guy in there like Mitchell And since HoJo wasn't getting the start at third he must have played most of the games at short instead of incumbent Raffy Santana, right? Or maybe, just maybe, Davey played the guys he had, like EVERY OTHER MANAGER, including the one currently running the Mets. I loved those late eighties teams. I hate waxing poetic about the past.

Milledge, our right fielder of the future.

holychicken wrote: The hypocrisy is what turned me off. He is obviously one of those "assholes at shea" that he so wants to avoid. I'm guessing that was his intent.

It made me crack up when Molina was complaining shortly after the Mets got LoDuca. He was talking about his lack of options and said something like he really thought he was coming to New York. Well then why didn't you respond to their offer, jackass?

My bad, I thought you had something besides the Post article. I don't give much credence to that article. (Elitist question: Proper usage of credence?)

Rotblatt wrote: That's a good point, BS, but it's hard not to wonder what might have happened. I mean, Molina & Piazza are still out there and Molina's making noise about taking a year off if he can't get the money he thinks he deserves--how desperate is that? And Piazza apparently offered his services to the Yankees for $2M as a backup catcher/DH--and got turned down! Someone's going to get great deals on Molina and Piazza and I'm kind of bummed that we're stuck with LoDuca at $12.5M over 2 instead. Especially since we gave up a promising prospect for him. At the time, I think I was indifferent to the trade, but that's back when I expected Hernandez to sign for 4 years, $32M & Molina to sign for 3 years, $24M. And I still held the faintest glimmer of hope that we'd turn LoDuca and someone else into Vazquez (at the time, Arizona was interested in LoDuca.). Anyway, I can't really blame Omar for the trade, as it seemed okay to me at the time, but in hindsight, we probably should have waited. I think this probably could've gone into the Catcher thread, at least my comments are the same as there. The LoDuca move is one I give Omar a ton of credit for. As BS said, he cut off the game free agents play. Molina and Hernandez had a week to consider the offer, and didn't say one way or the other. They obviously wanted to play the game of running to another team to get a slightly better offer, then running back to the Mets, etc. The availability of LoDuca helped Omar avoid all that crap.

]Y'know, the old bastards who insist on wiping your seat for you for a dollar. The ones who block every attempt to sit in better seats "because if they find out, I'll be fired." Who cares? How much are you making anyway you fucking jerk? Go watch Matlock. I like this one. Never had a problem moving up until about two years ago. Those crusty old men are a pain in the ass now. That thing is pretty damn funny. ___________________ This post had the designation 73) Art Shamsky

Is this true, or do you like just throwing random statements out there?

Yes.

David_Schnitzer: Did you ever get hot-footed by Roger McDowell? Strawberry: No. But, he got everyone else. I was one of the lucky ones.

At least one mod is vehemently against the reposting of messages from other boards. Or discussing people on said boards. Or even acknowledging that they exist.

The concensus by the radio "analysts" is salary dump and, possibly, the removal of Anna. I quote the "analysts" because if there was something else in the scope of any sort of rational or irrational thought, (actually probably especially if it was irrational), you'd think one of them would've brought it up. But even with some of those whacked-out imaginations, all they can come up with is salary dump and Annabanishment. I think some here have lobbied that this trade makes the team better. And this argument has been made without the shaky assumption that another starter is going to join the team. Let's just say there might be some money to be had in bridge-selling.

]Keppinger can do no worse. Kepp is probably ahead of him with the bat in my eyes, if it counts for anything. There is no possible way you could know how Keppinger and Hernandez play defensively, unless you live in Norfolk.