Elster88

]Wally Mathews/Tom Keegan/Don LaGreca/Michael Kay types who are still pissed at the Wilpons for the 24/7 conpiracy theories, I didn't realize this is was still a major topic of conversation. Here's a tip though: Don't listen to morons on the radio. That and switch to decaf.

I'm not going to say "Poor ARod" because the guy is rich. But it's amazing that he made the front page for playing poker underground. I mean really, who gives a shit? _____________________________ This post had the designation 132) Dennis Ribant

Vic Sage wrote: I don't give a ratzass how long Jacobs' career is. I'm not his mother or his manager. After 5 years, he'll be a free-agent and play wherever he wants anyway. At any rate, I'd rather have 5 years of a great hitting catcher, than 10 years of a decent hitting 1bman. How bout 10 years of a great hitting first baseman?

Good to see you, Francis. You don't make nearly enough appearances.

I don't see the rush to stick him behind the plate. Let him play first, play more games per year, and have a longer career.

I think most of us have gotten over the '88 NLCS. I haven't, though I got used to the bulldog, if that makes sense.

Pick him up for $1 million and stick him on the bench. It's not my money.

Oops I Did It Again....

Change his designation from Jim).

Speaking of low IQs, on the FAN they were saying Epstein tried to get rid of Lucchino, Lucchino blasted him for it, and Epstein got mad and left. I have no idea if this is accurate.

I wouldn't be too upset by this. The 2004 team was built on as many screw ups (ARod), and second choices (they wanted Vazquez over Schilling), as anything else. I posted all of this somewhere to make fun of a poster's decision to become a bandwagoner based on "management's committment to the fans" or some other such horseshit.

Edgy DC wrote: Why? Because it's not my money.

It sounds like Bobby is doing great things there. The only thing that I don't agree with is this: ]And it was going to be all right to come back to the dugout after a strikeout or an error, and kick your helmet. I hate this PaulO'Neillesque behavior.

]Trachsel, who underwent back surgery in March, will earn $2.5 million for 2006. He earned $6,782,500 for 2005 when he pitched merely 37 innings and qualified for none of the incentive clauses that would have dramatically increased his 2006 salary. Ugh. Not fair. Shitty time to get an injury. Throw a little more green at him, I say.

I love sentences like this. ]They can't negotiate with him until after the final day of the free agency filing period, Nov. 11, but they can speak with him about playing second base and other salient points, other than money. Omar: So Furball, how is your family? Furcal: Just fine thanks. I sure miss them though. I've felt like I was 15 million miles away from them for the past three years. Omar: I'm sure it's gotta be tough. I agree with everything you've said. Well, thanks from coming in, and we'll see you on the eleventh.

I agree, my fine feathered friend.

It would be exciting to have the top TWO stolen base guys from the NL on the same team. Does anyone else still feel shocked at all this speed when remembering the years when the Mets were near the bottom of the league in SB? Edit: Talking about Furcal here, obviously, not Soriano.

I'd have no problem bring Loopy back as a setup guy.

sharpie wrote: He's a good player and becoming a better hitter. Had career highs in homers and obp this past season. I am wary of these statements about a 31 year old catcher. Don't most catcher start going downhill at 33? I forget the magic age for catchers. Maybe it was higher than that.

Who is the better SS between Reyes and Furcal?

Jason, do you have any relatives of the Yankee-fan persuasion who lived in Connecticut for a short while before moving out to Texas?

smg58 wrote: You don't deal your best prospects unless you know you're getting an elite player in return I disagree with this, very,very strongly, but that's probably more of a difference in our respective TiTTS ideaologies than anything else. smg58 wrote: If the Mets had traded Wright two years ago for somebody like Zito, we'd be regretting it now. . True, but I would wager that for every Milledges that turns out to be a Wright, there are many more that turn out to be an Escobar. (I sense Escobar-defense posts are coming.) smg58 wrote: Plus, we currently have eight guys who could be in somebody's rotation next year, along with four capable outfielders, and more than enough money to pursue free agents. I just don't see why acquiring players that could make us contenders should cost us Milledge or Petit. What you are saying here is much different than "he's not worth Milledge alone, much less Milledge and somebody.", which is the main part that I disagreed with. I agree we have other areas to improve besides SP, and I would happily trade Milledge to see them addressed.

So Zito, a 27 year-old left-handed former Cy Young award winner, is not worth Milledge alone? He's a prospect, for crying out loud. Ignoring the fact that a starter, as Rotty pointed out, is about sixth on our list of needs, the idea that Barry Zito is not worth giving up Lastings Milledge for is ridiculous. No matter how high he is on RotoWorld's Top Ten Prospects List. I know this all started with a Peter Gammons' rumor, but the reaction can be staggering when there is a rumor involving one of the Met Farm Kids being traded.

There were many, many close games down the stretch that one clutch hit would've won. I think the preceding statements was the main ammunition for "The Mets had a good offense last year" theorists. And we weren't seven games out when Manny was supposedly available. Maybe one win in the middle of that ugliness would've kept the Mets from losing 10 out of 12 or whatever it was. I don't really want to get into a discussion about this. I just think it's food for thought. And that we absolutely, positively need a big bat.

All good points, Rotty.