soupcan

Frankie's da bomb. Always makes it interesting, always gets it done. Exactly what we were told we were getting with him.

But really - are there any losers in Liberty -v- Freedom match?

Look how excited we all are. What a bunch of geeks.

I'm very curious to know the most common score. Can't wait for the big reveal!

I think I saw that Valentin was released recently....?

Can you imagine if they were the Burros (I believe they were going to spell it 'Boros' which is the common local shorthand for 'Boroughs'), or the freakin' Skyliners? You think 'New York Mess' is bad on a newspaper backpage? How do you think 'New York Jack-ASSES' or 'New York CRY-liners' ('Eyeliners'?) woud have been? *shiver* 'Avengers' might have been cool.

How many distinct scores have there been? 869 What is the most common score, and how many times has it occurred? 5-3, 198 times Other than tie games, what is the closest score that has not yet been the final score of a Mets game? (30 total runs or fewer. We know that no game has ever ended with a score of 106-105, for example.) 13-11 Of the final scores that have not yet happened, which score has the fewest combined runs? 16-4 (20) What score was the most lopsided in Mets history? (largest difference between the winning team's runs and the losing team's runs) 22-1 What's the most lopsided shutout? 13-0. What's the most lopsided score that has occurred more than once? (It's happened three times.) 15-1

But yeah, it would use the same tuner so if I would change the channel from my PC it would change on the physical TV in his house and if someone in the house used the cable remote to change the channel back, it would change back on my end too.

="Benjamin Grimm":15awrxrn]Does it use the same tuner that the TV is tuned into? In other words, if you're in California and you tell your laptop that you want to watch the Mets, does your brother-in-law's TV change channels? If so, I can see that getting annoying if he or his family is watching something else and the channel suddenly changes.[/quote:15awrxrn] He has one TV dedicated to the slingbox that nobody watches, so its not a problem. Benjamin Grimm Jun 24 2009 12:32 PM That's kinda how I thought it would work. Interesting. soupcan Jun 24 2009 12:44 PM But yeah, it would use the same tuner so if I would change the channel from my PC it would change on the physical TV in his house and if someone in the house used the cable remote to change the channel back, it would change back on my end too. Benjamin Grimm Jun 24 2009 12:53 PM So that's the answer. Find somebody in New York who's willing to dedicate a spare TV to a SlingBox. If that person also has SNY, you'd be able to watch every Mets game as if you were in New York, without even needing Extra Innings. Gwreck Jun 24 2009 12:59 PM Yep. The Slingbox was a great idea. I believe the way the Slingbox changes channels is that it has a small infared-emitting device which you just stick in front of the cable box and can be used to change channels/etc. I guess it would also work to control a DVR if you taped the game and then wanted to watch it later. Swan Swan H Jun 24 2009 01:15 PM Yup. You get full control of the remote that works with the box, so if the box has a DVR you can use it as well. It's a GUI image of the remote, which is a bit weird, but works great. We got one last year when our son headed up to Boston for an internship, and this has allowed him to watch the Rangers, Giants and Mets, and record games when he had to work at night. Last time we went up to visit he had one of the Music Choice channels playing through the Slingbox on his laptop. He said it was better than the radio, since there were no commercials. bmfc1 Jun 28 2009 12:05 PM Gwreck, The rules are stupid. Las Vegas baseball fans are blackout out of six different teams! I have both EI and mlb.tv. If I could only pick one, I'd pick mlb.tv because you get the Mets games on WPIX. EI only shows the cable games. This includes the Saturday 1:10 starts which are n/a on EI. (This is one of the two dumbest aspects of the blackout rules--the other is that FOX games that are not shown in your market are still not shown on EI or mlb.tv).

="Benjamin Grimm":3o1m20b1]As I mentioned above, you can get a Slingbox and install it at a friend's or relative's house in the New York area.[/quote:3o1m20b1] Slingbox is how I watch the gay dames during the week when I'm at work. My bro-in-law has one and I just log into it from the office as I have no TV here. I've also used his slingbox via my laptop from Caifornia to watch the Metskis. Benjamin Grimm Jun 24 2009 11:26 AM ="soupcan":3cx58r9v]="Benjamin Grimm":3cx58r9v]As I mentioned above, you can get a Slingbox and install it at a friend's or relative's house in the New York area.[/quote:3cx58r9v] Slingbox is how I watch the gay dames during the week when I'm at work. My bro-in-law has one and I just log into it from the office as I have no TV here. I've also used his slingbox via my laptop from Caifornia to watch the Metskis.[/quote:3cx58r9v] Does it use the same tuner that the TV is tuned into? In other words, if you're in California and you tell your laptop that you want to watch the Mets, does your brother-in-law's TV change channels? If so, I can see that getting annoying if he or his family is watching something else and the channel suddenly changes. Fman99 Jun 24 2009 11:31 AM ="soupcan":2yrm7wxc]="Benjamin Grimm":2yrm7wxc]As I mentioned above, you can get a Slingbox and install it at a friend's or relative's house in the New York area.[/quote:2yrm7wxc] Slingbox is how I watch the gay dames during the week when I'm at work. My bro-in-law has one and I just log into it from the office as I have no TV here. I've also used his slingbox via my laptop from Caifornia to watch the Metskis.[/quote:2yrm7wxc] I am considering getting a slingbox for this kind of thing. Woot is selling them today in fact for $100 (refurbs). soupcan Jun 24 2009 11:37 AM ="Benjamin Grimm":15awrxrn]Does it use the same tuner that the TV is tuned into? In other words, if you're in California and you tell your laptop that you want to watch the Mets, does your brother-in-law's TV change channels? If so, I can see that getting annoying if he or his family is watching something else and the channel suddenly changes.[/quote:15awrxrn] He has one TV dedicated to the slingbox that nobody watches, so its not a problem. Benjamin Grimm Jun 24 2009 12:32 PM That's kinda how I thought it would work. Interesting. soupcan Jun 24 2009 12:44 PM But yeah, it would use the same tuner so if I would change the channel from my PC it would change on the physical TV in his house and if someone in the house used the cable remote to change the channel back, it would change back on my end too. Benjamin Grimm Jun 24 2009 12:53 PM So that's the answer. Find somebody in New York who's willing to dedicate a spare TV to a SlingBox. If that person also has SNY, you'd be able to watch every Mets game as if you were in New York, without even needing Extra Innings. Gwreck Jun 24 2009 12:59 PM Yep. The Slingbox was a great idea. I believe the way the Slingbox changes channels is that it has a small infared-emitting device which you just stick in front of the cable box and can be used to change channels/etc. I guess it would also work to control a DVR if you taped the game and then wanted to watch it later. Swan Swan H Jun 24 2009 01:15 PM Yup. You get full control of the remote that works with the box, so if the box has a DVR you can use it as well. It's a GUI image of the remote, which is a bit weird, but works great. We got one last year when our son headed up to Boston for an internship, and this has allowed him to watch the Rangers, Giants and Mets, and record games when he had to work at night. Last time we went up to visit he had one of the Music Choice channels playing through the Slingbox on his laptop. He said it was better than the radio, since there were no commercials. bmfc1 Jun 28 2009 12:05 PM Gwreck, The rules are stupid. Las Vegas baseball fans are blackout out of six different teams! I have both EI and mlb.tv. If I could only pick one, I'd pick mlb.tv because you get the Mets games on WPIX. EI only shows the cable games. This includes the Saturday 1:10 starts which are n/a on EI. (This is one of the two dumbest aspects of the blackout rules--the other is that FOX games that are not shown in your market are still not shown on EI or mlb.tv).

WTF?! Beltran's going on the DL again? This season is just bullshit.

Edgy DC wrote: That settles it. I'm naming my kid "Hagar." As in 'Sammy' or 'The Horrible'?

="seawolf17":pep7rik2]...Pete Incaviglia, Jesse Barfield, Cory Snyder, and Bob Allison. I'd stick any of them in the outfield over a 20-year-old kid.[/quote:pep7rik2] Pete Incaviglia? Really? You need to re-think that. Edgy DC Jun 17 2009 10:48 AM Unless he's gotten as big as I fear, Wily Mo has always been a good defensive outfielder. No Barfield, but no Incaviglia either. Mets with options: SPs: Nieve RPs: Parnell Switzer Takahashi Cs: Santos IFs: Murphy OFs: Fartinez Hawkeye57 Jun 17 2009 01:56 PM I think that Willy Mo is a good alternative should (heaven forbid) any outfielder that isn't Beltran get sick/hurt and require the DL. Not completely sold on Willy Mo just yet. Haven't gone to any of the Bisons games yet this season so I don't have a firsthand look so far. Ashie62 Jun 17 2009 04:50 PM ="Edgy DC":88672rsw]The present has some importance also.[/quote:88672rsw] I'm a litle surprised hasn't been included in the cattle call yet Edgy DC Jun 22 2009 10:13 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 22 2009 10:55 AM A small dream dies today with the news that Wily Mo Pe�a has been released along with javier Valentin. Not much in the way of clues behind either. Valentin had been playing the infield for Buffalo, and had just come off of the DL. Maybe he was unable to catch and when he hadn't recovered his catchiness while recuperating, they cut their losses. Wily Mo is another case, as he had been hitting. The only clue I have comes from this report on Friday night's game. In the third inning, Wily Mo Pena blasted had a solo home run that cleared three tiers of outfield signage. In the fifth he was removed from the game after suffering apparent cramps while legging out an infield single.With no further info, I'm guessing he either (1) became a casualty in the Mets fake war against dogging, or (2) became distraught when Evans got promoted over him and asked for his release, either explictily or through pouting and dogging. Anyhow, one of the spots goes to Arturo Lopez (real first name: Javier), a lefty reliever from Mexico, picked up on waivers from the Pads. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 22 2009 10:18 AM "That large man hits balls over fences? He simply clubs them out? Why, that's quite vulgar, and most definitely NOT in the spirit of Metropolitans brand base-ball." smg58 Jun 22 2009 10:52 AM ="Edgy DC":3551cmku]Not much in the way of clues behind either. Valentin had been playing the infield for Buffalo, and had just come off of the DL. Maybe he was unable to catch and when he hadn't recovered his catchiness while recuperating, they cut their losses.[/quote:3551cmku] That sounds plausible. It would seem odd at face value to cut their next best catching option after dealing Castro, but if he can't catch then he's not really worth much. And we still have Robinson Cancel in case of an emergency. ="Edgy DC":3551cmku]With no further info, I'm guessing he either (1) became a casualty in the Mets fake war against dogging, or (2) became distraught when Evans got promoted over him and asked for his release, either explictily or through pouting and dogging.[/quote:3551cmku] Well he did beat the throw, so I doubt it had to do with dogging. But I wouldn't put it beyond Pena to take getting passed over on a promotion poorly. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 22 2009 11:06 AM ="smg58":h2tlz1zf]="Edgy DC":h2tlz1zf]Not much in the way of clues behind either. Valentin had been playing the infield for Buffalo, and had just come off of the DL. Maybe he was unable to catch and when he hadn't recovered his catchiness while recuperating, they cut their losses.[/quote:h2tlz1zf] That sounds plausible. It would seem odd at face value to cut their next best catching option after dealing Castro, but if he can't catch then he's not really worth much. And we still have Robinson Cancel in case of an emergency. ="Edgy DC":h2tlz1zf]With no further info, I'm guessing he either (1) became a casualty in the Mets fake war against dogging, or (2) became distraught when Evans got promoted over him and asked for his release, either explictily or through pouting and dogging.[/quote:h2tlz1zf] Well he did beat the throw, so I doubt it had to do with dogging. But I wouldn't put it beyond Pena to take getting passed over on a promotion poorly.[/quote:h2tlz1zf] Refused assignment with the Nats earlier this year-- it's how he got released. It doesn't seem implausible he signed with the Mets thinking he was 'one away' and felt betrayed in some way when that didn't immediately materialize. (I'm not sure I understand Evans over him, either. Ah, well.) Fman99 Jun 22 2009 12:27 PM Dumb. Like the Mets don't need an OF with pop in his bat. I continue to be mystified by Omar and Jerry and their "boobery" of roster and lineup management. metirish Jun 22 2009 01:25 PM Pena is the kind of player that would thrive under Bobby Valentine , not that that means anything. Just that he reminds me of a Benny Agbayani type. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 22 2009 02:34 PM ="metirish":m03tfpx2]Pena is the kind of player that would thrive under Bobby Valentine , not that that means anything. Just that he reminds me of a Benny Agbayani type.[/quote:m03tfpx2] Except a LOT bigger. He wasn't exactly killing it up north, and is less "outfielder" than "a guy who can fake three OF positions," but he did have a higher home runs/PA (1/30) than half of today's starting lineup, and a three-or-four-year stretch in his recent rearview where he absotively posolutely murdered lefties. Unless he took a bat to somebody or fondled a batboy/girl/dog behind closed doors... I don't get it. Edgy DC Jun 22 2009 09:08 PM And Conor Robertson gets DFA'd. It's a bloodletting up in Buffalo. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 22 2009 09:19 PM Ike Davis in the meantime was promoted to AA. He was killing it in St. Lucie. He's the LH hitting 1Bman they drafted with their first pick last year. Connor Robertson was Jeff Wilpon's "addition by subtraction" booshit.

="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":2c0vsjel]And if so, exactly how bad a won-loss record did that team have?[/quote:2c0vsjel] HA! seawolf17 Jun 17 2009 10:29 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":2rjh078v]And if so, exactly how bad a won-loss record did that team have?[/quote:2rjh078v] Let's just say their mascot was the Oriole, if you know what I mean. seawolf17 Jun 17 2009 10:33 AM And speaking of which, how is this guy knocking Mr. Met, a Mascot Hall of Famer, when their mascot's name is "The Bird"? Seriously? That's the best the Baltimore think tank could come up with in 1979? metsguyinmichigan Jun 17 2009 12:16 PM "I mean I HATE the Yankees, yet because I've somehow have drunk some Yankee history kool-aid, and admit to buying Yankee gear, memorabilia..." Oh, Steve. I don't think this was a good idea. Some things, you just gotta keep to yourself, and this was numbers 1, 2, and 3. metirish Jun 17 2009 12:20 PM I'm curious about Stevo's previous 11 posts going back to 2006. DocTee Jun 17 2009 12:57 PM ]no one is the Yankees...the Mets do belong on...eh, maybe a third tier of great franchises. no comments needed Swan Swan H Jun 17 2009 01:21 PM Steve's lack of perception about how his words are perceived make him a natural fit for the Mets front office. seawolf17 Jun 17 2009 01:32 PM Like he thinks we can't find this stuff. The FBI should hire Edgy; he'd find Jimmy Hoffa in twenty seconds. Benjamin Grimm Jun 17 2009 01:52 PM ="Swan Swan H":1sd5lqgy]Steve's lack of perception about how his words are perceived make him a natural fit for the Mets front office.[/quote:1sd5lqgy] Remember that radio spot that used to run during Mets games? "Every time you speak, people judge you by the words you use." Edgy DC Jun 17 2009 02:07 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 17 2009 02:23 PM Let's take it easy on Stevie. If he wants to tag in on that guy for me, more power to him. Fight Non sequitur with non sequitur, so to speak. Triple Dee Jun 17 2009 02:12 PM The O's are my AL team. I feel an emotional breakthrough connected with this admission. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 17 2009 02:15 PM I'm impressed with the O's fans' retience in engaging Rogers in combat. I think O's fans are good eggs generally and they certainly are our allies in MFY hatred. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 17 2009 02:27 PM ="Edgy DC":kjqp900i]Let's take it easy on Stevie. If he wants to tag in on that guy for me, more power to him. Fight Non sequitur with non sequitur, so to speawk.[/quote:kjqp900i] "Well, arguing that point is like trying to figure out the nose-shadow on the Elston Howard memorial in Monument Park, you know-- it just doesn't make sense. I hate that feeling of futility like I hate the 26-time World Champion New York Yankees!" "I understand that, Chief! Because I'm from Jersey, Doc!" Benjamin Grimm Jun 18 2009 12:48 PM Last night, as I'm watching the game, when Aubrey Huff stepped to the plate I, for an instant, forgot what decade I was in and thought I was looking at a young Rusty Staub.

I'm going dead-arm. Just makes the most sense to me. Dominant early on, less so, then pounded hard. It seems like his velocity has just dipped is all. He'll be back in a start or two. Patience is a virtue my fellow Metsaholics.

Willets Point wrote: ="soupcan"]I fucking hate this this team. No one is forcing you to be a Mets fan. Go watch some other team. Fuck you. I'm allowed to vent.

I fucking hate this this team.

Santana - 2 Beltran - 1.5 Rodriguez - 1.5 Wright - 1.5 Cora - 1.25 Church - 1 Feliciano - 1 Tatis - .25

I guess that's the best they can throw out there right now.

IT IS HIGH...up! IT IS...not so...FAR! However, IT....IS....GONE!

But Ibanez was a real possibility. I've been thinking about that one all year. He was very gettable.

Makes me curious as to what our homer-weary boys will do this weekend at the band-box in the Bronx.

="Edgy DC":1h6sa6g8]I don't think that headline really represents his comments.[/quote:1h6sa6g8] Yeah, it doesn't really does it? He's actually just commenting on it rather than criticizing it. I don't care, fuck him anyway. Centerfield Jun 09 2009 08:05 AM Since Chipper's not saying it, I will. The dimensions of the park seem stupid based on how it's played so far. Again, I'll wait to see how it plays out over the year before asking them to move the fences, but at those dimensions, it's dumb to put them that high. I don't like going extreme in any direction. Citizen's Bank Park is stupid. So is Petco. Give me a park that plays fair. Like Shea. 8 foot fence, regular arch with no juts or dips please. TransMonk Jun 09 2009 08:12 AM Uhhh... Home Runs Per Game 2009: Citi Field: 1.46 Turner Field: 1.28 http://www.hittrackeronline.com/stadiums.php John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 09 2009 08:16 AM I tend to side with Soupy here in a general sense since I like a park that discourages fly-ball HRs and rewards smashes into the gaps and running the bases and home runs that are no-doubters. I also think its way too early to declare how the park will play over the long season, and that the Mets' relative dearth of home runs has more to do with the fact that they have so few true HR hitters now that Delgado's gone. Wright is also a power-binge kinda guy, you might remember he's taken an entire half-season off from hitting HRs in the past, after the HR Derby in 06. PiggiesTomatoes Jun 09 2009 08:20 AM ="TransMonk":3kxbdsz5]Uhhh... Home Runs Per Game 2009: Citi Field: 1.46 Turner Field: 1.28 http://www.hittrackeronline.com/stadiums.php[/quote:3kxbdsz5] Great reference. MFYSIII, 3.62 (probably before last night's five homer game). More than ATT, Turner & PNC combined. Fman99 Jun 09 2009 08:25 AM Larry needs to shut his cake hole. Nymr83 Jun 09 2009 08:35 AM if Chipper doesnt like it then I now like it even more. smg58 Jun 09 2009 11:25 AM It really didn't sound like Larry ripped anything, to be honest. Benjamin Grimm Jun 09 2009 11:34 AM No, not at all. But that headline is making everyone ANGRY! OlerudOwned Jun 09 2009 12:44 PM I would love the headline if it was for a news story in which Chipper literally slammed into the side of Citi Field at a very high speed. Citi Field is much larger than Chipper Jones. Willets Point Jun 09 2009 06:16 PM Do you think he'd like it better if they replaced the Shake Shack with a Hooters? SteveJRogers Jun 09 2009 06:29 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":105lqzb8]No, not at all. But that headline is making everyone ANGRY![/quote:105lqzb8] [The Post Headline Hack...errr writer]My work here, is done![/The Post Headline Hack...errr writer] Desperate for any attention, they'll resort to screaming the headline that a hated Met villain (though, many, many years now removed from when THAT meant anything in the grand scheme of things) hates the place where the Mets play. MFS62 Jun 09 2009 08:24 PM How can we put this delicately? Oh. I know. Who cares what you think, Chipper? Later

...about anything Chipper Jones has to say. ] CHIPPER SLAMS INTO CITI FIELD By BART HUBBUCH June 9, 2009 -- Longtime Mets nemesis Chipper Jones did so much damage to the Mets' old ballpark that he named one of his sons "Shea" in honor of it. It's safe to say the Atlanta slugger won't be making any similar tributes to Citi Field. Jones ripped the Mets' new park in a recent radio interview, blasting the decision to make it play so big. "It is the biggest park that I have ever played in in my life," Jones told the show "Ripken Baseball" on Sirius XM Radio. "It is a huge ballpark to center and right center and right field. You know, I actually feel sort of sorry for some of the guys out there because their power numbers are really going to take a hit; guys like David Wright, [Carlos] Beltran, [Carlos] Delgado. The days of them hitting 35, 40 homers -- they're over." Jones also recalled a telling moment from his first visit to Citi Field last month, when the Braves took two of three. "I juiced the ball just right of center field, as hard as The Good Lord can let me hit a ball, and it hit midways up the center-field wall for a double," he said. "And every time there was a long fly-out or a double that hit off the wall or something, David Wright would run by me and go, 'Nice park.' "[Wright] is a little frustrated with it, but on the flip side of that, you got a guy like Jose Reyes who's liable to hit, in a healthy year, 25, 30 triples in that ballpark, because if you split a gap you can run forever." I like the big park. I like that a homerun becomes an event rather than a frequent occurence. I like the triples and I like that the Mets will have to be built on pitching, speed and defense.

="TheOldMole":3vvzzjve]Love em. Unconditional.[/quote:3vvzzjve] This is the right answer. Fman99 Jun 08 2009 07:56 PM ="Vic Sage"]]I don't understand this team. I don't know anything. Shut up. yup © This is me, too. I suspect I shall like them more should they develop some more consistency hitting and beating better teams. cooby Jun 08 2009 08:27 PM ="TheOldMole":yikjqrfj]Love em. Unconditional.[/quote:yikjqrfj] Well yes. The Mets are like a son to me Willets Point Jun 09 2009 07:57 PM How can anyone not love this team? Rockin' Doc Jun 12 2009 09:08 PM I am rapidly losing faith in this band of walking wounded. Base running gaffes, legions of stranded runners, giving away outs with persistent sacrifice bunting, untimely errors, and poor fundamentals are starting to be too much for me to take. This bunch is not easy to love. metirish Jun 12 2009 09:10 PM ="Rockin' Doc":3pw3i8lp]I am rapidly losing faith in this band of walking wounded. Base running gaffes, legions of stranded runners, giving away outs with persistent sacrifice bunting, untimely errors, and poor fundamentals are starting to be too much for me to take. This bunch is not easy to love.[/quote:3pw3i8lp] And that's just the players.... Willets Point Jun 12 2009 09:16 PM Pretty lame. If you're going to hate the Mets every time they lose you may as well jump on the bandwagon of whatever team is winning. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 12 2009 10:16 PM ="Willets Point":2gaapyul]Pretty lame. If you're going to hate the Mets every time they lose you may as well jump on the bandwagon of whatever team is winning.[/quote:2gaapyul] I know, I know, you're an optimist. I usually aim and strive for that. But, shit, man-- we're venting in a friendly space, in innocuous fashion. Let us let it out. holychicken Jun 12 2009 10:43 PM Come on, Willets, you have to admit that this team is incredibly hard to route for at this point. They have been playing terrible ball and losing far more games that they should have won than winning ones that they should have lost. Edgy DC Jun 12 2009 10:48 PM root. Willets Point Jun 12 2009 11:10 PM Venting is great, criticism is fine - especially with the facts to back it up. I object to the fact that every day for like the past two years I come to this site and see reactionary crap like "sucks" and "hate" about a team we're supposed to be supporting. I object to moral judgments like "he's lazy", "he's stupid", "he doesn't want to win" "they don't have heart" and all that bullshit as opposed to intelligent observations about the player/team/strategy based on facts and statistics. I don't know what's happened to the Crane Pool. This used to be the site that avoided all the reactionary hater kind of stuff. Shit, even in 2004 I remember folks here being supportive of the team and that team was pretty lousy. The past four seasons we've had a good, contending team with some of the best, most exciting players in the teams history. I don't like seeing them make mistakes and fail to live up to their potential either, but just spouting a bunch a crap makes this forum no fun. I've tried quitting but keep coming back for some reason. Maybe it's just a memory. Willets Point Jun 12 2009 11:19 PM Short version of the above post: if you hate this team, don't watch them. For your sake and mine. Benjamin Grimm Jun 13 2009 04:45 AM Come on now, "rapidly losing faith" doesn't mean "hate them every time they lose." I do agree that there's sometimes too much angst here; maybe it's easier for some to root for a team that's not expected to win anything, because the losses are less critical. I don't buy into pure optimism. "They'll win because I want them to win and I have faith that they will." That's only worked out twice in nearly a half century. But Willets is right: If watching this team causes upset and aggravation that you can't quickly put behind you, then you might want to consider a more relaxing hobby. Rockin' Doc Jun 13 2009 06:00 PM ="Willet Point":22ljqhel]Pretty lame. If you're going to hate the Mets every time they lose you may as well jump on the bandwagon of whatever team is winning.[/quote:22ljqhel] ="Willets Point":22ljqhel]Venting is great, criticism is fine - especially with the facts to back it up. I object to the fact that every day for like the past two years I come to this site and see reactionary crap like "sucks" and "hate" about a team we're supposed to be supporting. I object to moral judgments like "he's lazy", "he's stupid", "he doesn't want to win" "they don't have heart" and all that bullshit as opposed to intelligent observations about the player/team/strategy based on facts and statistics. [/quote:22ljqhel] I'm not sure if you were addressing my post of last night or not, but since it immediately follows mine I will assume that you were. First of all, nowhere did I use "sucks", "stupid", or "hate" to express my frustration with the Mets play this month. I think that the poor baserunning decisions and the games the Mets have simply given away with shoddy defensive plays, like last night, are fairly apparent and quantifiable this season. The Mets penchant for getting runners on base and then failing to drive them is maddening (at least to me) and is, in my opinion, exacerbated by Jerry Manuel's frequent giving away of outs by sacrifice bunting. I did not say that I was not rooting for the Mets or that I would not continue to pull for the team to win. I said they weren't easy for me to love. I am a Mets fan and I will continue to cheer for them and hope for the best, but I will to do so with a sense of realism regarding their play. I'm sorry if my less than optimistic view of the team's play doesn't meet your approval or high standards for a fan.