Elster88

It's still funny.

True. Just because it's obvious doesn't mean I shouldn't take advantage. Did Ripken choose not to swing at that fastball in his last All-Star Game?

Anna Benson is part of the BJ Bunch.

If anyone buys them he'll probably take them out back and pee on them. That's what I'd do.

Forgive me if this has been posted somewhere else. Mets.com is hosting an interactive chat with Wright at 2:30 today. http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/fan_forum/chat/index.jsp

A good flick. I'm smitten with Naomi Watts.

]One has to wonder why they would give Tavarez, who made $2.6 million in 2005 and is looking for a significant raise, four years but were unwilling to go two years on Roberto Hernandez, who was extremely productive last season. One doesn't. Bert is 41 years old. How dumb are some writers? If they write lines like that how can I possibly take their rumors seriously? Note to self: Never read anything on Rotowire.com.

]To some degree it happened with Kazmir. To some degree? It's still happening to a huge degree. And what boggles my mind is that people say things like "after what he showed last year I'm even more pissed about this deal." I always want to shout at those people and ask them what the hell were you watching last year. It was nice but nothing to make you call for anyone's head. I don't remember who it was, but someone here was even blaming Omar and Willie for the Kazmir trade. Lash out at anyone and everyone if you're cranky. Throw those temper tantrums.

Not that I'm complaining or anything, but you'd think for an event primarily for kids she'd wear something a little less slutty. This is part of why I believe all the good community work is little more to her than a chance to have her chest photographed to advance her career. Edit: I'm NOT complaining.

I'll take 94. Someone get a gun on Rotty.

]If they would have benched him (and taken the hit) he would be viewed as overpriced, You keep saying this but I'll respond with the same question that I have about benching Kaz. Who in God's name would've stepped in? Your usual contention is that it doesn't matter since we're not in a race, and to play some random kid and see if he shows you something. But in Rey's case, the Mets were in contention for most of his Met-career. What's Rey up to these days?

Me too me too.

Bret Sabermetric wrote: Elster--don't forget about Matsui. With Kaz they didn't really have any other options, and I think they've been trying to get rid of since the middle of last year. Actually my argument has been all along that Willie was playing Cairo waaaaay too much.

I'm too young to have seen it in the theater. Was the "I am your father" line like a punch in the gut? Was it a shock? Or did people know ahead of time? Homer spills the beans in one Simpsons episode and a guy in line is pissed. With no Internet and whatnot I'm guessing it was not generally known, unless a dumbass like Homer ruined the surprise.

Princess Organa was correct. She was a princess and a senator. I was watching a special feature on one of the DVDs where Lucas said his original idea was to make the father the main character in IV, V, and VI, and his name would be Anakin Starkiller. I'm glad he changed it. Skywalker is much cooler.

2005? I guess you mean Piazza? Minky's butt was placed firmly on the bench in crunch time last year. Glavine came back to form. Edit: Ah! Ishii too. Spent way too much time trying to get him to turn around.

][C] Martinez, 35, has spent parts of eight seasons with six teams, batting .230. Maybe Heiptas isn't going to AAA. I see no reason why we signed this guy except to replace DiFelice.

Bret Sabermetric wrote: ="Elster88"]]The vast majority of teams will try to get some kind of a return on investment rather than let an $8 million per year guy sit on the bench. Vast majority = all Well, if you're going to go all high finance on me, there's an adage that applies here: "Don't Send Good Money After Bad," that addresses the problem I'm identifying. If you've made a mistake, it's suicidical to continue with that mistake just to justify having made it. If you've spent 8 million on a stock that's gone into the shitter, at some point you need to take what you've invested and put it elsewhere, even if that means taking a loss on the original mistake. That's precisely what Fred refuses to do, and what I'm fauiting him for here. Look at it in baseball terms for a second. I don;t think anyone disputes that if the Mets had Ordonez at just under $500,000 rather than just under $5,000,000 per year, he would have lost his job. Well, since that money had already been lost by the time everyone on this planet decided that Ordonez deserved to lose his job, and nothing was going to earn Fred back a nickel, why did he keep his job for a few more years? Look, Fred, sometimes your front office is going to make bad choices--if you're not going to allocate some money to take care of your ballteam when this happens, your team is not going to win, and ultimately that will cost you more money than you're saving with your present policy. Hey you're preaching to the choir. Fred should be faulted. But so should every other owner/GM combo in baseball.

]The vast majority of teams will try to get some kind of a return on investment rather than let an $8 million per year guy sit on the bench. Vast majority = all

I think I'll put out a press release: An unnamed CPF insider stated that it was "absurd" to believe that a one sided trade such as the proposed three way deal between the Mets, Marlins, and Devil Rays would happen. Which is more believable? This or the article two posts above? Common sense tends to trump unnamed sources.

Vic Sage wrote: yes, he avoided the bidding war by trading valued prospects for an older, inferior catcher, when he could've signed one of 2 younger, better catchers for slightly more money and a draftpick. BRILLIANT! He deserves a gold star. That's one way to look at it. I'm wearing my blue and orange glasses and arguing that the word slightly becomes "a lot" if the bidding war had ensued.

Better to debate Rey than to argue over who is the most hated whatever.

Maybe some time in the future.

RealityChuck wrote: A pretty good sequel, but not up to the original. It just didn't have the impact that Star Wars -- probably the most influential movie in the past 30 years -- had. Well done, but it wasn't new any more, and that weakened it. Impact, bah. Influential, humbug. Which one did you enjoy more?

Are we all done here, Bret?