roger_that

Edgy MD wrote: Well, the Angels would be terrifically foolish to take back another megadeal in exchange for the one they are trying to dump, so deGrom, Lindor, and Scherzer are probably be right out. Right. It's not clear who would back out faster, us or them, but someone would, I think. Which is why I'm interested in a huge package of dirt-cheap prospects. Are there enough of them in any organization (or in the Mets') to make such a deal feasible?

all of the information I was keeping them for was in Baseball-reference.com. Obviously, not "all." Read the complete sentence, "all of the information I was keeping them for". I was trying to help. Later Fair enough.

all of the information I was keeping them for was in Baseball-reference.com. Obviously, not "all." Sounds like they probably have these annuals at the library in Cooperstown.

There's been talk about the Angels dealing off Trout or Ohtani, and basically starting all over with a broader talent base (or something) but I wonder what the appropriate level of compensation would be for either of them. Just for fun, I also imagined the Angels packaging the two together. Now, if the Mets were to make a bid for this package, would they (or any team) have what it takes to compensate the Angels fairly for such giant superstars at their peak? Does any team? Of course, if the Mets were to include, say, Alonso and DeGrom and Scherzer and Lindor and maybe a few other stars, they would be able to offer fair compensation, and both teams in such a fair deal would be questionably improved, but how about if the Mets (or any team--I'm sticking to them here because they're the organization we know best) offered a giant package of their top ten minor league prospects in exchange for one of them, and their top twenty prospects for the pair? After a certain point, the sheer number of prospects who will eventually play well at the MLB level has to be a valuable commodity, though I suppose after a certain point you're just offering crappier and crappier prospects in bulk. Looked at from the reverse perspective, if the Mets were willing to strip their system for a star player, basically say to another team, "You can have any five (or seven or ten or whatever) players in our minor league system in exchange for X" how good a player would X be? Which team, in this scenario, would be likelier to say "Are you nuts? We ain't trading X for a bunch of prospects!" (or alternatively "Are you nuts? We ain't trading all out best prospects for X!") In terms of, say, Trout, you've got to figure he's got maybe five seasons ahead of him before he's no longer a superstar. (Could be two seasons, could be ten, but five seems reasonable.) That's about how long it would take to restock the Mets' minor league system. I guess what I'm trying to ask here is: would a deal of Superstar X for a bunch of prospects be possible, and if not, which side would want the deal more?

=kcmets post_id=99909 time=1657924499 user_id=53] The seven-inning doubleheader is still a thing? Will any of this bullshit ever revert back to normal. I'm quite sick of it all.

Thanks, but I'm hoping to find a site that tracks with OCD precision every single roster change, and the dates, of every MLB team, or at least the Mets. Sort of like the Transactions part of BB-ref, which tracks only trades, FA signings, releases and the like. I want one, preferably run by a crew of anal-retentives, that traces every minute adjustment that teams (or the Mets) have ever made. From reading the CPF, I can easily imagine the controversies, speculations, arguments, discussions, that accompanied each one at the time.

=kcmets post_id=99889 time=1657915464 user_id=53] [Ctrl +] and [Ctrl -] also toggle font sizes.

Kranepool is the only player I know of who sat on the bench for a week or so in full uniform prepared to get into a game but did not. (In June or July--he later did make a few appearances in a Met uniform.) I'm satisfied that Kranepool's ghostly incarnation is accurate (he apparently has been describing it in print for decades) but where are things like this documented? I suppose I could look in old newspaper files or the like, if I were really curious. I think Kranepool is the only signee this happened to, but I could be wrong. Anyone know if other players signed a contract out of high school and reported to the Mets as members of the 25-man team other than Kranepool? It seems kind of nutty, in retrospect, a nineteenth-century sort of thing, one step above hauling guys out of the grandstand to play a MLB game. I wonder who vacated a spot on the roster to allow Kranepool onto it. Came across this article on FB about 1962 roster moves, which mentions Kranepool's getting called up from Syracuse in July (he didn't, ultimately) and I'm wondering if anyone knows how (other than reading old newspapers) you might learn which players got sent down to, or called up from, or released, or signed, or traded, put on the DL, or whatever. Does this data exist anywhere? Facebook WWW.FACEBOOK.COM Facebook WWW.FACEBOOK.COM

They don't charge separate admissions? How do they keep everyone in the ballpark for three hours?

Click on the three vertical dots in the upper right corner. Then Settings, Appearance, and Font Size Thanks. Those three dots don't always appear, nor does the magnifier/zoom/crosshairs-within-the-circle thingie. That's the infuriating part--sometimes it's right there, sometimes neither is visible. Grrrr! It's funny about Ed Bauta's good looks. I don't much notice such stuff, unless someone is unusually good-looking or unspeakably homely, but I've always, even as a kid, had him in the latter category. "Poor guy, must be tough rising to the top with an ugly mug like that" sprt of thing.

I know Charlie Rubin pretty well personally. I can forward questions to him if anyone cares. He'll be pleased that someone remembers that piece--it's one of the things he's written he's proudest of. (He also wrote the best Seinfeld episode ever--"The Marine Biologist.")

=kcmets post_id=99717 time=1657818280 user_id=53] McNeil back tonight. Couldn't find a Marte status just yet.

Came here to post my version of "My Sweet Lord" only to find that I'd already posted it....

It's purely a win-win. I don't get why teams are so reluctant to make the best of a short-term injury to give some high-performing kid a taste of MLB.

Yeah, some of my most intense memories are of disappointments to find I'd hauled myself out to the ballpark and gotten good seats near the 1b bag so I could watch Hernandez perform his magic only to learn that Keith was taking the day off and I'd be staring at Danny Heep's ass all afternoon.

GG material

My last two trips to Citi I was a guest of my GF's business (she was entertaining clients, and pretty plush out-of-town clients at that) so I got comped to dinner seated at the Club, drinks, desserts, all kinds of chazerai. If it didn't cost $200 per guest, I'd be amazed. Maybe $300, taking transportation and parking into account. We could watch the game as we pigged out on any of twelves TVs, and then stroll about the park until we found our fancy seats eight rows behind the Mets dugout, and I got to explain the rudiments of baseball to a bunch of foreigners who'd never seen a ballgame in their lives. But I had more fun sitting in the bleachers on tix saved up from milk cartons. Who was bashing the police? I missed that.

Getting way off-topic here, but the smartest move i ever made is moving out of NYC just before the pandemic--I cannot believe that unmasked people by the dozens would be breathing in the same tightly packed sealed off space as I'm in for over an hour in the midst of a highly transmissible pandemic, and this would be perceived "Oh, well, life goes on, waddayagunnado?"

The one variable I've introduced here that isn't being discussed is the "hitting a grounder towards an unoccupied 3B vs. bunting towards an unoccupied 3B" question. Am I wrong to think that the former is easier than the latter for most hitters? Even forgetting about the advantage that swinging away gives you on two strikes (fouls count as fouls, not strikes three), it seems to me more natural and more feasible to do. Plus if you actually get the ball hit semi-hard to 3B, you might get a double out of it. So why bunt with two strikes instead of trying to hit a grounder towards 3B? It's a 90mph slider tailing away from you, or a 98 mph fastball letter-high, now you don't just want to hit it, you want to hit it a tiny fraction of a second late so it goes towards third? It's a cliche so often spoken that it's practically stupid to say so anymore: a RH batter in certain situations is trying to slap a pitch to the right side of the infield to move the runners up a base. It's fundamental baseball, it's just good execution, it's simple elementary small-ball, but you want to pretend for some bizarre reason of your own that a LH batter doing the exact same thing (only to the left side) is performing brain surgery on an insect while flying upside down at Mach speed? Please.

Edgy MD wrote: and (not explicitly stated) really expensive. No, I stated "expensive" explicitly. I've gotten very frugal in my old age, and a day at the park has, adjusted for inflation, gotten ridiculous. Just guessing, I'd say "1 mezzanine ticket = 3 movie tickets or 12 loaves of bread" in 1970, and now it's more like 8 movie tickets or a Toyota Rav4-ful of bread. Plus my couch is infinitely more comfortable than a hard chair.

=kcmets post_id=99253 time=1657559575 user_id=53] Text sizes are adjustable in all browsers.

The one variable I've introduced here that isn't being discussed is the "hitting a grounder towards an unoccupied 3B vs. bunting towards an unoccupied 3B" question. Am I wrong to think that the former is easier than the latter for most hitters? Even forgetting about the advantage that swinging away gives you on two strikes (fouls count as fouls, not strikes three), it seems to me more natural and more feasible to do. Plus if you actually get the ball hit semi-hard to 3B, you might get a double out of it. So why bunt with two strikes instead of trying to hit a grounder towards 3B?

i've pretty much stopped going to the ballpark, any park. Expensive, inconvenient, uncomfortable, noisy, often surrounded by people who don't understand how to behave in public, plus I get home too damned late every time. Even after I moved out of NYC (I went to a few games at Citi, hundreds more at Shea), and I could comfortably drive to the ballpark in various towns, it felt like a hassle. I'm pretty sure I've been to my last in-person game, unless I feel social pressure to do so for some reason. I'm much more comfortable sitting on my couch and muting the commercials. Also screaming "Get off my lawn!" every so often.

Yeah, but that means that you've effectively moved the defense out of what they think is their best positioning against you. What I'm talking about here is bunting against the shift, not bunting against a more traditional defense.

A few reflections http://www.faithandfearinflushing.com/2022/07/11/new-york-retains-its-challenge/within. Good stuff. Any chance you could use a slightly larger font size?