Master Index of Archived Threads


Douchebag Journalists

metirish Dec 15 2009 04:29 AM

Step right up Harper....this is catnip for the raging Mets fan New York Mets never had shot at Roy Halladay, John Lackey on Black Monday The worst part about Black Monday for the Mets is that there wasn't anything they could have done about the Red Sox signing John Lackey or the Phillies trading for Roy Halladay. And that speaks more to the chaotic state of their organization than it does to any questions about spending money. Let's face it, the Mets are seen in baseball circles as losers these days, a team full of holes going into next season with a lame-duck manager and a GM already on the hot seat. Compared to the Red Sox and Phillies, then, what exactly is there to like about them? So it was no surprise that Lackey apparently had zero interest in playing for the Mets, at least as long as the Red Sox wanted him. The Mets sensed as much from the preliminary conversations they had with his agent, which is why they decided to make an offer to Jason Bay instead. Indeed, short of offering him Johan Santana money, the Mets had no shot at Lackey. Same for Halladay. With a no-trade clause and the option of signing or not signing a contract extension, he was in control of any trade the Blue Jays made, and as long as the Phillies were willing partners, he too had zero interest in playing for the Mets. The Phillies were highly attractive to him partly because Halladay makes his home in Florida, near the Phillies' Clearwater spring training camp, and more so because the two-time defending NL champs give him the chance he desperately wants to win a World Series. The Mets knew this too, which made it easy for them to justify shying away from serious trade discussions with the Jays. The feeling among many baseball people is that they weren't willing to consider signing him to a $100 million-plus contract extension when they are already paying Santana at that level. In any case, while it's not clear how much stock to put in reports that the Jays would have been open to trading Halladay to the Mets had GM Omar Minaya been willing to give up Jose Reyes, a major league GM with knowledge of the situation said it's irrelevant. "Halladay wasn't going to the Mets," the GM said. "His people were letting everyone know he was only going to a winner - the Phillies, Red Sox, Yankees, or maybe the Angels, although he wanted to be in the East because he lives in Florida. "The problem for the Mets is that after everything that happened to them last year - the injuries, the record, the front office controversies - they're just not very appealing to star players who have choices." So the aftershocks keep coming for Mets fans. A month or so after living through their nightmare World Series, Black Monday forces them to confront the reality that they are almost surely playing only for a wild-card berth in 2010, as Halladay all but assures the Phillies a fourth straight NL East title. Of course, had the Phillies held onto Cliff Lee rather than get Halladay in a trade that is still not final, the Mets would have been looking at the same fate. But there is something about Halladay going to Philly that symbolizes the huge gap between the two teams at the moment. For that matter, the Mets should take a hard look at how the Phillies have built a powerhouse ballclub. Most important, they did it with a farm system that produced the likes of Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, Jimmy Rollins, and Cole Hamels, as well as another wave of top prospects that allowed them to deal for Lee and now Halladay. Because the Mets have so few top prospects at the upper levels of their farm system, they couldn't begin to fill the holes created by all their injuries last season, and they are at the mercy of a weak free-agent class this offseason. Maybe they will sign Bay, who should help, and it appears they will get Bengie Molina, an upgrade at catcher. But because the Mets have a starting rotation littered with question marks, Lackey was the free agent they needed most. Never fear, though. Word filtered out of Venezuela yesterday that the Mets are aggressively pursuing Kelvim Escobar, the 33-year-old righthander coming back from nearly two years missed because of shoulder surgery. Halladay, Lackey, Escobar. Black Monday indeed.

Kong76 Dec 15 2009 04:44 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Harp: Compared to the Red Sox and Phillies, then, what exactly is there to like about them? <<< I ain't reading that whole column, and this says it all anyway.

metirish Dec 15 2009 04:46 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

You'll miss this gem then..... Indeed, short of offering him Johan Santana money, the Mets had no shot at Lackey. Seriously , you get paid for this?

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 06:24 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="metirish":1srgnabo]The worst part about Black Monday for the Mets is that there wasn't anything they could have done about the Red Sox signing John Lackey or the Phillies trading for Roy Halladay.[/quote:1srgnabo] The worst part about Black Monday is that some douchebag journalist named it Black Monday even though there was nothing black about it, but they needed a douchey angle.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 15 2009 06:29 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

This is just so over the top it's ridiculous:

HahnSolo Dec 15 2009 06:35 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="metirish"]You'll miss this gem then..... Indeed, short of offering him Johan Santana money, the Mets had no shot at Lackey. Seriously , you get paid for this?

Didnt Harper, less than a week ago, write a screeching column about how the Mets had to get Lackey NOW? No mention then how they had no shot at him.

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 07:09 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

That child and her family don't deserve that.

Ashie62 Dec 15 2009 07:20 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

No one wants to play for the Mets? Some may not, but the Mets money is just as green as the others

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 07:40 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Oh, and Yankees-Phillies is not my nightmare World Series. I'm don't live on fear as much as you want me to, douchebag journo. If I had a nightmare World Series --- and I don't because my nightmares aren't about baseball --- it would be... Yankees-Yankees, I guess. Or maybe Yankees-Zombies.

MFS62 Dec 15 2009 07:47 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Edgy DC":7vvls6fa] If I had a nightmare World Series --- and I don't because my nightmares aren't about baseball --- it would be... Yankees-Yankees, I guess. Or maybe Yankees-Zombies.[/quote:7vvls6fa] That wouldn't be a problem for me. I'd be rooting hard for the Zombies. Later

Centerfield Dec 15 2009 08:03 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Me too. I'm trying hard to think of a team that I despise so much I would actually root for the Yankees to win. So far I have Al Qaeda.

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 08:05 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

It would have to be some sort of high stakes nightmare World Series, where the winners would get to take our women and destroy our institutions and act as petty tyrants for the next 12 months. Pillaging, plundering, parking in handicapped spots, building non-code hockey rinks, that sort of thing. That would be a nightmare.

MFS62 Dec 15 2009 08:09 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Edgy DC"]It would have to be some sort of high stakes nightmare World Series, where the winners would get to take our women and destroy our institutions and act as petty tyrants for the next 12 months. Pillaging, plundering, parking in handicapped spots, building non-code hockey rinks, that sort of thing. That would be a nightmare.

Y'mean (gasp!) ... it would be the Yankees against the Yankee fans?

Later

Centerfield Dec 15 2009 08:13 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

There you have it. There's our nightmare World Series.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 15 2009 08:19 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

What, me worry? Omir Santos won the Topps Rookie Cup!

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 08:45 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

There you go. Now focus on that in your mind while you chant Ohmmmm...

Fman99 Dec 15 2009 09:01 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

So the aftershocks keep coming for Mets fans. A month or so after living through their nightmare World Series, Black Monday forces them to confront the reality that they are almost surely playing only for a wild-card berth in 2010, as Halladay all but assures the Phillies a fourth straight NL East title. You want to crown em, you crown em! THEY ARE WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE! What utter ridiculous bullshit this line is. They are assured exactly what everyone else is before the season starts. Fucking hacks.

SteveJRogers Dec 15 2009 09:53 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

At the end of the day, where are they wrong? This team was full of holes and question marks before the injuries piled up last year and so far the Mets haven't done a darn thing to fix any of them. Blame Omar for not being a competent GM, or blame the Wilpons (and perhaps Madoff) for tightening the purse strings, but following last season's disaster (whether a bunch of Met fans on an internet forum thought it was prudent or not) big changes were needed to show the fans that this is not 1994-1996 revisited. You know, when the biggest acquisitions were the "other" Pedro Martinez, David Segui, etc. How are the Phillies now not considered the odds on favorites now to 4-peat the NL East? And how are the Mets as presently constituted not odds on favorites to have a season no better than 2009? They might be douchebag journalists and headline writers, but they aren't off the mark in terms of what the Mets have been doing this winter.

MFS62 Dec 15 2009 09:56 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Edgy, about that nightmare.... Later

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 15 2009 09:57 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Then there's the douchebag fans who call up WFAN to lick their wounds and threaten to cancel their seas ... oh, hi Steve J. Didn't see you come in.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 15 2009 09:58 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Because they're stopped-clock brand right, Steve, and they're simply piling on, not making any sort of fresh or incisive point. It's the print equivalent of troll-baiting, except the writers are paid for this.

MFS62 Dec 15 2009 10:04 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":3spelta6]Because they're stopped-clock brand right, Steve, and they're simply piling on, not making any sort of fresh or incisive point. It's the print equivalent of troll-baiting, except the writers are paid for this.[/quote:3spelta6] Dali gave us the best skewed image of a stopped clock. By comparison, these guys are like two year olds fingerpainting on a wall. Later

batmagadanleadoff Dec 15 2009 10:07 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="SteveJRogers"]And how are the Mets as presently constituted not odds on favorites to have a season no better than 2009?

Because 2009 was like having your house blown away by a hurricane while you were out eating lunch at your favorite diner and then getting hit by lightning when you came back to see what was left of your house. Tragic stuff for whch there is no one to blame. That season won't be repeating itself. Or ... what are the odds, really?

Things aren't as bad as they seem despite what Mr. Hubbuch wants you to believe. In 2006, the Mets were in it right up until the final at bat in game 7 of the NLDS. In 2007 and 2008, they were eliminated from playoff contention on the last day of the season, despite carrying bullpens that might've been the worst performing in modern baseball history. From 2006 through 2008, the Mets were the winningest team in the NL. And because the Phillies also play in the NL, this means that the Mets won more games than the Phils during that period. Their four best players still might be better than the four best players of any other team; they're certainly comparable. The Mets are a flawed team for sure, but not a bad team. They're closer to the top of the division than to the bottom of it. And the Mets biggest problem over the last few years, as I see it, was luck.

If you wanna start shit about the Jackie Robinson Rotunda or their stupid uniforms, I'll join in and volunteer to go to the front of the line. But the Mets are not a bad team.

SteveJRogers Dec 15 2009 10:11 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":318bo92y]Because they're stopped-clock brand right, Steve, and they're simply piling on, not making any sort of fresh or incisive point. It's the print equivalent of troll-baiting, except the writers are paid for this.[/quote:318bo92y] Well, what else do you want them to say? That the Mets are doing a good job staying pat? That the smoke and mirrors coming from the farm or whatever Omar has coming is going to be a magic elixer to what ailed the Mets all year? Perez is magically going to be what he was in the 2006 postseason again? Rodriguez is going to go back to his 2008 form? Reyes is going to stop regressing? There is nothing positive to say about the Mets outlook for 2010, would you'd rather them be silent on all Met related issues? And then they'll be as obscure as the Nets are right now.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 15 2009 10:12 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I hope the Mets don't stand pat but even if they do, they're bound to pick up 10-15 Wins just by staying healthy.

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 10:18 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="SteveJRogers"]At the end of the day, where are they wrong?

When they sat down at their word processors

[quote="SteveJRogers"]This team was full of holes and question marks before the injuries piled up last year and so far the Mets haven't done a darn thing to fix any of them.
No, they weren't, and I doubt that you can find a post of yours arguing they were.

[quote="SteveJRogers"]...big changes were needed to show the fans that this is not 1994-1996 revisited.
The fans don't need to be shown anything. The idea is to improve.

[quote="SteveJRogers"]You know, when the biggest acquisitions were the "other" Pedro Martinez, David Segui, etc.
Yeah, Pedro Martinez was never a big acquisition and never sold as one. Neither was Segui. So I don't know. And the Mets did improve considerably after the offseason when they acquired David Segui.

How are the Phillies now not considered the odds on favorites now to 4-peat the NL East?

They were already and the off-season isn't over.

And how are the Mets as presently constituted not odds on favorites to have a season no better than 2009?

What's your bet? I'll put my Mr. Met lunchbox up again. The Mets will have a better season, winning more games, than in 2009.

They might be douchebag journalists and headline writers, but they aren't off the mark in terms of what the Mets have been doing this winter.

That's not what they're writing about, Steve.

MFS62 Dec 15 2009 10:19 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="SteveJRogers"] There is nothing positive to say about the Mets outlook for 2010, would you'd rather them be silent on all Met related issues? And then they'll be as obscure as the Nets are right now.

HEY!
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
But when you start bashing my Nets, well, them's fightin' words.
Step outside. I'll be waiting for ya'.

Later

Number 6 Dec 15 2009 10:23 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Edgy DC":3dwjjk1o]What's your bet? I'll put my Mr. Met lunchbox up again.[/quote:3dwjjk1o] To take this bet would normally be insane, but if you're offering odds and I'd be putting up something significantly less awesome than a Mr. Met lunchbox, I'd consider it just to get a shot at the booty. A Mr. Met lunchbox... seriously.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 15 2009 10:33 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists Edited 3 time(s), most recently on Dec 15 2009 10:47 AM

My problem isn't that it's critical. My problem is that it's hacky. If this were a story about specific instances where Omar declined to make a move for Halladay or Lee or some similar pitching resource-- based on information to which I was not previously privy-- I would be reading, re-reading and forwarding that information, however damning it might be. If this were a story that looked at the baseball aspect of the trade, irrespective of the "Mets angle," one that gave Met/Yank fans who don't normally follow other teams' prospects a window into a genuinely-intriguing three-way baseball transaction, I'd cheer Harper. Hell, if it skipped the non-Mets part and just looked forward in any meaningful, comprehensive way-- in-depth speculation, even-- to options beyond the much-reported Bay-Molina shit, I'd be pleased... and, sadly, shocked. He-- as do Madden, Matthews and the overwhelming majority of the beat writers/columnists-- has instead churned out a column that could have been written by keyboard-macro, with cheap shots at moves like the Escobar offer (which actually makes sense, AND HAS NOTHING TO FUCKING DO WITH ANYTHING) to boot. Additionally, since many of my friends and acquaintances-- as well as a solid handful of the posters here-- have been hit hard by press-industry job-loss, I take it somewhat personally when guys like this do their job with less thought, insight and f*cking CARE. You're paid to do this job, you should do it with at least as much interest and attention-to-detail as guys like Eric Simon, Cerrone, Greg and board members here. Fan or no, Harper hasn't for quite some time. OE: Edited for tense and s-v agreement; I'm nerdy like that.

metirish Dec 15 2009 10:39 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Well said LWFS...or well written.... You just know Harper is getting wood thinking about the column he will write if the MFY's get Bay, imagine all the cheap shots he'll get in if that happened......

Number 6 Dec 15 2009 11:28 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":1jv0oyp9]He-- as do Madden, Matthews and the overwhelming majority of the beat writers/columnists-- has instead churned out a column that could have been written by keyboard-macro...[/quote:1jv0oyp9] I have a suspicion that NY tabloid sports columnists are instructed by their editors to cater to Yank fans' superiority complexes and Met fans' inferiority complexes. It sells papers, particularly since this treatment of each team excites/rankles the fans of the other. Either that, or the columnists made this realization on their own, but with so many doing the same thing I tend to think it's a top-down strategy.

Vince Coleman Firecracker Dec 15 2009 11:36 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="SteveJRogers":10ldoasj] Reyes is going to stop regressing? [/quote:10ldoasj] Okay, I'll bite. This is Jose Reyes' career value from Fangraphs: Season.Team...... Batting.......Fielding......WAR..Dollars 2003....Mets....... 3.5............2.6............1.9....$5.3 2004....Mets....... -6.5..........1.1............0.3....$1.0 2005....Mets....... -8.8..........-3.2...........2.0....$6.8 2006....Mets....... 23.5..........2.8............5.5....$20.3 2007....Mets....... 12.2..........7.5............5.1....$21.0 2008....Mets....... 26.1..........0.0............5.9....$26.4 2009....Mets....... 2.1...........-1.9...........0.7....$3.4 Go ahead and point to the regression. Take your finger and point at it. Did your finger stop somewhere around the 2009 stats? Do those numbers look unusual next to the others? Did, maybe, something happen to Reyes in 2009 that caused the numbers to look unusual? Oh. He was injured for most of last year? Huh. And maybe his stats from last year are less about regression and more about the injury? Possibly? And other than that, has his value has been rising since the beginning of his career? Isn't that, you know, kinda the opposite of regression?

metsguyinmichigan Dec 15 2009 12:57 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Going after flawed free agents because they were the best names that particular year is how we ended up with Vince Coleman and Bobby Bonilla. Demanding a trade for trade's sake is how we got Mo Vaughn. Look at it this way. By the time spring training rolls around, the Mets will have added an All-Star shortstop, an All-Star centerfielder, an All-Star -- if not all-world -- starting pitcher, a 15-game winner, a 12-game winner, all of which will help the All-Star third-baseman with some protection in the lineup. Obviously I'm talking about Reyes, Beltran, Santana, Maine, Perez and Wright. Just getting those guys back makes us a formidable team. Anything else builds on that foundation. C'mon, nobody here was really saying, "Damn, I sure wish we had John Lackey in our rotation." He's this year's version of Derek Lowe, a free-agent at a time when there were no real big guns out there and will cash in. And I call bullshit on any statement that no one wants to play for the Mets. Media capital of the world. Hasn't hurt Wright, Santana or Beltran boost their national recognition. If guys would rather cash their checks in Oakland, Dallas or Pittsburgh, because last year's team was wracked with injuries and Omar screwed up a press conference, screw them. I hear Milwaukee and Miami are nice in the summer.

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 01:07 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

B-b-but... it's December 15th!

Ashie62 Dec 15 2009 01:27 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="batmagadanleadoff":3nuyg7r2]I hope the Mets don't stand pat but even if they do, they're bound to pick up 10-15 Wins just by staying healthy.[/quote:3nuyg7r2] They should win 10-15 more by accident, if Citifield is not on top of an Indian burial ground.

Met Hunter Dec 15 2009 01:47 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

It's the impatience of "fans" and their quick fix attitude, coupled with all the overdone sports talk, that has made me care less and less about hot stove talk. I no longer care what people think of the Mets. They have an excellent core, with the chance to improve and have a much better year in 2010. I'm more inclined to agree with MetGuy and some of the other positive spin posters, than to buy into all the negativity created by asshole MFY shills.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 15 2009 01:51 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

My confidence in the Mets on the other hand has been more than a little shaky lately, but if anything they got sturdier this week when they didn't go and turn themselves inside-out so as to "win" some meaningless contest to make the largest splash or impress the most obese radio hosts.

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 01:58 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I'm more of a wait-and-see poster, or a tell-me-about-it-when-it-pops-up poster, myself. I mean, while I agree that the Mets should get better than 70 wins by stting still, it doesn't take a second lightning strike to ruin 2010. It's altogether possible that Reyes, Beltran, Santana, Maine, and even Nieve have sustained such injuries that they are never the same again. That the Mets sign Delgado and get the same. So I'm loathe to put a 10-15 number on my expectations. But I do know about probabliity, and I think folks dwelling on ledges ought to get some persepective or hurry and up and jump. This same shit happens every offseason, and tabloid hacks get folks all convinced that this year --- THIS YEAR! --- is the cruicible. My prediction for this offseason is the Mets will make some helpful deals, some hurtful deals, and we'll see. I like analyzing them too, but if we're going to bring in nebulous factors like need to prove something to the fans, and act like a big market club, and going for championship not wildcard, and must respond to most painful playoff misses ever, and such, we're clearly just looking to be aggrieved and enjoying the time honored sport of feeling like we're smarter than the rich and powerful. Maybe you are. Maybe we all are. But show me with logic, not foggy stuff like that.

metsmarathon Dec 15 2009 02:24 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

sports teams should only care about placating the fans inasmuch as making moves which will eventually lead to putting winning, championship-caliber teams on the playing surface. making moves to quiet the unruly fans, or simply to preempt their expected unruliness, is what led to most of the shitty mets teams in the mid 90s and mid 00s, and is also what led to the knicks trading away patrick ewing. fans should demand that their team makes moves which improve the team, not make moves which improve the quality of back-page headlines written about them. personally, i'd like nothing more than for the mets to make a ton of quiet, smart signings this offseason that causes untold uproar all across the newspapers and the radio shows and the internets, only to have those quiet, innocuous moves work out smashingly well in their favor. it probably wouldn't have any lasting effect in terms of shutting up the morons out tehre, but it would be nice for a while thinking that it might.

G-Fafif Dec 15 2009 02:24 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

So it was no surprise that Lackey apparently had zero interest in playing for the Mets, at least as long as the Red Sox wanted him. The Mets sensed as much from the preliminary conversations they had with his agent, which is why they decided to make an offer to Jason Bay instead. Phrases like "apparently" and "sensed as much" are code for "I don't really know, but I have this hole to fill and I'm going to fill it with something about the Mets sucking, even if the Mets and Lackey were never reported anywhere as any kind of realistic match." Never fear, though. Word filtered out of Venezuela yesterday that the Mets are aggressively pursuing Kelvim Escobar, the 33-year-old righthander coming back from nearly two years missed because of shoulder surgery. Halladay, Lackey, Escobar. Black Monday indeed. Threes! Bad things come in threes! That's why the Mets suck so much, darkening Black Monday even more! Natch if the MFYs were interested in signing an under-the-radar veteran pitcher with a history of injuries, they'd be credited for maintaining the intrepidness to never stop beating the bushes for potential bargains because you never know who's going to step in and help put you over the top. Today may not be Bright Tuesday, but it's not because yesterday was Black Monday. Call me on April 5.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 15 2009 02:27 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

And yet, perception kinda matters as much as reality when you're selling a product, right? If half of your front-office problems stem from doing a poor job of communicating and selling your ideas, and you can't/shouldn't make the crowd-pleasing move, then where does that leave you? It's depressing. One wonders if the heat would be a little less wilting if the Wilpons were better at celebrating Met history, managing pricing, and the other customer-service meat/PR filigree.

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 02:32 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

No, I don't think perception matters as much as reality. Because reality drives perception and not really the other way around. A 10-game winning streak will drive a whole lot of good columns a lot faster than a whole lot of good columns will drive a 10-game winning streak.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 15 2009 02:39 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":o2i6ohrg]And yet, perception kinda matters as much as reality when you're selling a product, right? If half of your front-office problems stem from doing a poor job of communicating and selling your ideas, and you can't/shouldn't make the crowd-pleasing move, then where does that leave you? It's depressing. One wonders if the heat would be a little less wilting if the Wilpons were better at celebrating Met history, managing pricing, and the other customer-service meat/PR filigree.[/quote:o2i6ohrg] I agree with this completely.

TransMonk Dec 15 2009 02:40 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Edgy DC":3ent7t0h]A 10-game winning streak will drive a whole lot of good columns a lot faster than a whole lot of good columns will drive a 10-game winning streak.[/quote:3ent7t0h] Nicely put.

G-Fafif Dec 15 2009 02:44 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":2muw5job]It's depressing. One wonders if the heat would be a little less wilting if the Wilpons were better at celebrating Met history, managing pricing, and the other customer-service meat/PR filigree.[/quote:2muw5job] Yup, it's the old "when you're going horsespit..." rule of narrative. Lackey got an insane deal from the Red Sox. Halladay had a specific, semi-legitimate reason to want to be a Phillie (spring training near home) and Escobar...who gives a fig about whether they invite Kelvim Escobar to camp? But the Mets had a lousy year and don't appear too deft at other things of late. So of course it's Black Monday. Players join teams all the time. When did it become the Mets' responsibility to become the first team each player should consider every time -- which is essentially what Harper the Hack is suggesting? I'm not thrilled Halladay's in the same division and, yeah, Lackey would have been useful, but neither ever seemed to be The Plan. To treat these discrete events in the same realm as the Mets lowballing Vladimir Guerrero or fumbling a trade for Ken Griffey isn't logical or fair. Those were potential acquisitions in which we were led to believe the Mets had a strong shot at the player and missed. Halladay always sounded like a neat-o pipe dream and Lackey was never more, "apparently," than a conversation between Minaya and Lackey's people. Harper's implied thesis that every time another team signs a good player it reflects poorly on the Mets because the Mets didn't and, therefore, the Mets couldn't, is ludicrous. Do 29 other teams exist in a Met-defined vacuum? That's MFY thinking.

Frayed Knot Dec 15 2009 03:32 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

The NYPost's Mike Vaccaro, on the other hand, tries staying a bit more on the sane side: Mets fans aren't going to like this, mostly because so many of them have taken full advantage of their First Amendment right the past 24 hours or so to express their disdain for the way things have shaped up this postseason. And, sure, for anyone who had their hearts set on Roy Halladay or John Lackey wearing orange and blue, yesterday was a blue Monday. But I don't believe it was a Black Monday, as it's been described elsewhere. And here's why: If you were thinking rationally -- and I don't expect Mets fans to do that; they've been beaten up repeatedly by inept ownership and poor management the last three years, and are allowed to punch back -- ask yourself these two questions: 1. Would you really have included Jose Reyes in a deal for Roy Halladay, even if Halladay had agreed to waive his no-trade clause and accept a trade to the Mets? I think it's a fair question. I think there are a lot of folks who have hopped off the Reyes bandwagon, who are spooked by his leg injuries, who remember how much heat he was taking immediately prior to landing on the DL last year. But I also think it is useful to remember just how good Reyes is at his very best, and I firmly believe he has an MVP-level season or two in him, and if that's true then you have to keep the guy who can impact 70-80 games for you rather than one who will impact a maximum of 33 or 34. You just do. 2. Would you really have paid John Lackey five years and $85 million, even if Lackey had expressed a deep-seeded interest in switching to pitcher-friendly CitiField? Look, Lackey is a terrific pitcher, and he gives the Red Sox an eye-popping rotation, and he surely would have been a nice wingman to Johan Santana. And if we are playing with Monopoly money, sure, spend whatever you have to spend on whomever you wish to spend it on. But Lackey hasn't thrown 200 innings in three years. He has never won a Cy Young, and even in his career year of 2007 (19-9, 3.01) only finished as high as third, the only time he's even placed. Maybe you answer yes to 1 and yes to 2. Me? I wouldn't even go to a fifth year to secure Jason Bay's services, because as much as you want to scream at the Mets to do something, anything, to throw money at members of a weak free-agent class just because you want to throw it around is the kind of dangerous precedent that sets clubs back five or 10 years; and since the Mets already seem to have been set back five years or so by their shenanigans of the past few seasons, isn't it better to pick and choose from the vast list of non-tendereds, hope that the injured of 2009 are the healthy of 2010, and then wait for next year's free agent class that will possibly include the likes of Lance Berkman, Joe Mauer, Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, Cliff Lee and even Albert Pujols?

metirish Dec 15 2009 04:44 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Mike fecking Vaccaro.....I salute you. How did his editors let that one fly?

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 07:53 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

It really comes down to the "it was never going to happen." Get your money down before the wheel stops spinning next time.

Nymr83 Dec 15 2009 09:34 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Centerfield":1s9iqr5u]Me too. I'm trying hard to think of a team that I despise so much I would actually root for the Yankees to win. So far I have Al Qaeda.[/quote:1s9iqr5u] I was seriously considering Al Qaeda when the yankees played the Phillies, but then I realized there may have been employees in the ballpark who didn't actually root for either team and were just doing their jobs...

metirish Dec 16 2009 08:49 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Harper digs hard and finds a new angle What's wrong with Omar Minaya and the New York Mets? Maybe they miss Tony Bernazard When Omar Minaya was earning a reputation as a big-game hunter in his early years as Mets GM, nobody was more dogged in pursuit of free agents. At the Carlos Beltran press conference, in fact, Jeff Wilpon giddily noted that either Minaya or former assistant GM Tony Bernazard had been relentless, calling agent Scott Boras every day for 31 straight days. And so a strange and ironic thought occurred to me Tuesday as Minaya was asking increasingly impatient fans for patience as the big-name free agents have begun signing with other teams: The Mets miss Tony Bernazard. Please don't misunderstand this; Bernazard deserved to get fired last summer for his various displays of temper and outrageous conduct, and I'm not advocating that he be re-hired. It's just that the Mets seem all too willing to let the market come to them this offseason, when their situation practically demanded that they shoot themselves out of a cannon and go after the few difference-makers available in this weak free-agent class. As I wrote in Tuesday's editions, they probably had no realistic shot at John Lackey once the Red Sox got involved, but their only chance was to make a big offer at the very first opportunity, the way the Yankees did last year with CC Sabathia. Instead, Minaya admitted Tuesday to taking a rather casual approach, saying, "We talked to Lackey's agent last Friday, and we were going to talk again sometime this week." What happened to calling 31 straight days? Basically the Mets seem to need a push, and Bernazard, with his intensity and in-your-face style, wasn't afraid to push both Wilpon and Minaya to act decisively. Consider what he said at that Beltran press conference in January of 2005, when asked about hounding Boras for a month: "When I go after something, I go after something." We know now that Bernazard was a pit bull in all the wrong ways as well, from intimidating co-workers to challenging minor-leaguers to fight him, but the Mets need that pit-bull mentality right now. Minaya finds himself chasing players from a position of weakness similar to the one he faced upon taking over as GM five years ago. Only the sense of urgency doesn't seem to be the same. Maybe his hands are tied financially, but he has let Lackey and Chone Figgins sign elsewhere without any kind of fight. And while the Mets have put the word out that Jason Bay is a better fit at Citi Field than Matt Holliday, there is a feeling among baseball people that they simply weren't willing to meet Holliday's price, as dictated by Boras. In any case, it seems likely now that Holliday is heading back toward the Cardinals, which would leave Bay as the only big-ticket free agent left on the market. At the very least the Mets need to move quickly to lock him up. Because if they somehow miss out on Bay, especially now that the Red Sox appear to be out of the mix, the offseason would suddenly loom as the same type of disaster as the season itself. To this Minaya stood in front of reporters at the Mets' holiday party yesterday and insisted that the offseason is going according to plan. "We have a plan," he said. "We've targeted players and if we get our guys we're going to have a very good team. (To the fans) I would say be patient. In the past we've delivered, and I believe we're going to deliver again this year." The problem is their plan seemed to be built around the thinking that patience would yield bargains in a soft market, and they were caught off-guard when teams spent more aggressively than anticipated. Minaya can still salvage the offseason if he lands Bay, Bengie Molina, and either Jason Marquis or Joel Pineiro. If he wants kudos from Mets fans, however, he's going to have to do something creative like finding a cash-strapped trading partner as the Yankees did in landing Curtis Granderson from the Tigers. Indeed, Edwin Jackson, who went to the Diamondbacks in that three-way deal, would have been ideal for the Mets. So is it simply that they don't have the prospects to pull off such a move? Or is Minaya not quite the big-game hunter he was when he had a pit bull at his side?

Edgy DC Dec 16 2009 08:57 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Harper"]Ho-Ho-Hopeless!

Doo-Doo-Douchebag!

[quote="Harper"]And so a strange and ironic thought occurred to me...
...while thinking of how I can be a bigger douchebag.

[quote="Harper"]Please don't misunderstand this;
I don't. Douchebaggery needs new insane angles. I get it.

[quote="Harper"]As I wrote in Tuesday's editions, they probably had no realistic shot at John Lackey once the Red Sox got involved, but their only chance was to make a big offer at the very first opportunity, the way the Yankees did last year with CC Sabathia.
They had no realistic shot, but they did have a chance. They were too stupid to have a shot, but still had a chance, which they were subsequently stupid enough to blow. I'm sorry. You're under arrest.

metirish Dec 17 2009 01:26 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

This guy has everything said about the Mets amd the Mets needs this past few weeks ticked off and added to his article. http://nybaseballdigest.com/?p=19054 Four Years- Whatever- Mets Need to Get Bay Signed -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By Jed Weisberger ~ December 17th, 2009. Filed under: Mike Silva. C’mon, Omar Minaya, close the deal with outfielder Jason Bay. Lock him up, add him to your roster and give Mets fans something to cheer about. You watched as the Phillies went and got what they needed, trading both prospects and pitcher Cliff Lee to land Roy Halladay. This is the team you are chasing in the National League East and, provided Cole Hamels gets straightened out, way ahead of you at this point. Will Bay close the gap? Certainly not by himself, but he’ll make a big dent. All the dancing about years and dollars is silly. This guy’s bat – his power is down the left-field line – is built for Citi Field. A former Pirate (it seems there are a lot of them making good money and playing well), he is tuned to the National League. He’s a good guy, projects a good image, hits for power and average and drives in runs. What more do you want? On top of it all, the teams you seemed to be allegedly competing with for his services are turning elsewhere. Sure Matt Holliday is another option, but your ballpark doesn’t really suit his power game. Some will tell you Bay is a horrendous outfielder. That is being much too harsh. He has his issues from time-to-time, but you will be paying him to drive in runs. What I can’t understand about the Mets, unlike the Yankees, Red Sox and now the Phillies, is why the club can’t just go out in the free-agent market and sign the players it needs. I can’t think the Mets are willing to play second or third fiddle to the Phillies on an annual basis. Interesting it is the Yankees and Phillies filled their needs through trade, as Boston has done several times – Josh Beckett came to Fenway Park in a swap with Florida. Those teams are able to accomplish goals like that because their farm systems are in good shape. In the Phillies’ case, general manager Ruben Amaro managed to bring back three key prospects from the Mariners while signing Halladay to the extension he needed. There is also a credibility gap here. Halladay talked about going to the Phillies, Yankees or Red Sox. Did he ever mention the Mets? Minaya and Company should always be in the mix for these types of players. Get Bay signed and soon, so attention can be paid to bolstering the pitching staff. Japanese reliever Ryota Igarashi is a start, but why not add former Pirates closer Matt Capps – a bargain at $3 million annually – for depth. In baseball today, he who dawdles loses.

Edgy DC Dec 17 2009 01:35 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="metirish":2xlzxhpq]All the dancing about years and dollars is silly[/quote:2xlzxhpq] I agree. I think they sign him for fifty years at a zillion dollars. Guh!

Benjamin Grimm Dec 17 2009 01:38 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Yeah! Years???? Dollars???? Are those really the things you want to negotiate about???

metirish Dec 17 2009 01:39 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Right now I would give Bay 10 years and $252 million......and all the tents he wants.....

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 17 2009 03:21 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

All the dancing about years and dollars is silly. For this guy, writing about baseball is like dancing about architecture.

Frayed Knot Dec 17 2009 05:36 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I'm telling Elvis Costello you stole that line from him!!

metirish Dec 21 2009 09:07 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Harper will be banging his head after reading this wondering why he didn't think of it. Bob Klapisch Here's an idea: Mets should trade Santana By all accounts, the Mets are getting closer to wrapping their long, desperate tentacles around Jason Bay, but they’re keeping their options open in case he bolts to the mystery team that’s (supposedly) offering a five-year deal. Plan B is Matt Holliday, who’s probably using the Mets to scare up the Cardinals, his first choice all along. Plan C? Here’s a suggestion: ask if anyone’s interested in Johan Santana. Of course, the Wilpon family will do no such thing. They invested $137.5 million in the great lefthander and aren’t about to admit failure. But the current Mets core is beginning Year 5 of a golden era that wasn’t and considering how poorly Omar Minaya has done this winter, the drought isn’t about to end. Even if the Mets do sign Bay, he won’t make them as good as the Phillies, who are a lock to take the East for the third straight year. The Mets would be better off measuring themselves against the Braves, who have better pitching and a better manager. In fact, even the wild card is a long shot right now, so instead of continuing to over-spend on B-level free agents ($21 million for Bengie Molina? Really?) the Mets need to think about draft picks again. They need to address their bankrupt minor league system. They need to take advantage of their current invisibility and build towards a sensible, three-year reconstruction plan. They can do it by letting other GMs know that Santana is available. It’s true, dealing the franchise’s best pitcher would be tantamount to surrender. But it would be at least be an honest admission to fans, who’ve grown weary of the all the disappointment. One club official recently admitted season ticket sales are slow, adding. “hardly anyone is showing up for the tours (of Citi Field). “There’s supposed to be 50 people (in every tour), we’re hardly getting 10,” he said. The public is waiting for a reason to plunk down hard-earned money during the holiday season. The Mets had one legitimate shot at improving themselves this winter and saw it vanish when John Lackey signed with the Red Sox. Actually, Roy Halladay would’ve been the magic bullet, but the Mets, with nothing to trade, never got past the velvet rope with the Jays. Now, the back of the rotation is a billboard of under-achievement, featuring Mike Pelfrey, Oliver Perez and John Maine. Santana was supposed to deliver the Mets a pennant when he signed in 2007, so in a sense he has failed them. But it’s the Mets who are the guilty party; they’ve sabotaged Santana from Day 1. They’ve given him no help with pitchers who’ve either been injured (Maine), have regressed (Pelfrey) or were never worth the money (Perez, $36 million for three years). So the Mets can do themselves (and Santana) a favor by exploring a trade. This isn’t to say the market would jump at the chance. To the contrary: Santana is owed $21 million this year, which means there’s only a handful of teams who could afford him -- the Yankees, Red Sox and Angels -- and even they aren’t willing to spend that much. What’s crazy is that Santana isn’t even viewed as the elite pitcher he was two years ago. Despite being two years younger than Roy Halladay, Santana wouldn’t command the same contract as the Phillies’ new ace. Not now, not after elbow surgery cut short his 2008 season. Not after two years of disappointing results by his Mets’ teammates. Still, the Mets have to make peace with the idea that the Santana experiment has failed, just as the Carlos Beltran, Pedro Martinez and Billy Wagner gambles all turned to vapor. Yet, they continue to chase The Next Great Star as if this was 2006 and they were one player away from greatness. This long, flat road to nowhere will probably cost Jerry Manuel his job this summer. Minaya is on the hot seat, too. Both men are victims of Jeff Wilpon’s hyper-sensitivity to the public’s voice. The Mets have over-paid time and again for their free agents, leaving the franchise top-heavy, and burdened with contracts they can’t move. Actually if the Mets were capable of making a cold business decision, they’d even dangle David Wright and Jose Reyes. Wright, in particular, could bring a bundle of prospects in return -- and who knows, he might just welcome a trade since he’s playing in a new ballpark he obviously hates. Citi Field is 37 feet deeper in right-center than at Shea, and ownership made matters worse by announcing the dimensions won’t change next season. But the Mets could never part with either Wright or Reyes. They’re Home-grown talent; the emotional attachment is too strong. Santana’s place in the Met family is cemented only by cash. The Wilpons would have to eat some of that money to trade him, but it’s a scenario worth considering as the Mets keep pretending it’s still 2006 and winning the World Series is just a matter of writing one more check.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 21 2009 09:23 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Here's my take on that (reprinted with permission of me) He argues on the one hand that Santana would bring some bonanza of talent in a trade then goes on to say he's not worth his contract anyway. He acknowledges the list of potential suitors would be a short one but ignores the fact that none of them made a real move for Halladay. He says the Mets are loaded with unmoveable contracts when only Perez and maybe K-Rod would fit that description. His facts are wrong (Santana had surgery in 09, not 08). He says the Mets' problem is that they're too easily pushed around then proceeds to dare them to trade their best player because off-season stadium tours aren't drawing well. What? I think he's right that the club has been guilty to a degree of believing its own good reviews. He's also right that dangling Wright or Reyes would be the real way to attract attention, but then he's too big of a pussy to come out and advocate that.

metirish Dec 21 2009 09:30 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I find it hilarious that a "club official" is moaning about only 10 people showing up for tours of CF......like that's an indication af anything..... Not fair to say the Santana trade has been a bust .....

Benjamin Grimm Dec 21 2009 09:33 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

The Phillies are certainly a lock to win three straight division titles, since they've already done so! (Does he even know what year it is? He also has Santana signing with the Mets in 2007, not 2008.) He also says that the Carlos Beltran gamble has turned to vapor. Carlos did help lead the team to a division title; which is nothing to sneeze at.

Centerfield Dec 21 2009 09:42 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

There are so many contradictions in that article it's not even worth doing a point-by-point dismantling. Everyone put down their pens. We now have the dumbest article ever written. Thanks for playing.

metirish Dec 21 2009 09:42 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

And if you are going to rebuild why stop at trading Santana, Beltran , Reyes and Wright would bring back a large bounty.....tours of CF would be packed I bet.

MFS62 Dec 21 2009 09:45 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I'd rate that piece a "C", for copious cuantities of ca-ca claptrap. Later (OK, so I took poetic license with the spelling)

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 21 2009 10:04 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Centerfield"]There are so many contradictions in that article it's not even worth doing a point-by-point dismantling. Everyone put down their pens. We now have the dumbest article ever written. Thanks for playing.

Say what you will about Matthews... his articles do tend towards internal consistency. (That is, if you grant several ridiculous premises, they semi-logically follow.)

I wish Klapisch Bobby Bonilla as a roommate.

Fman99 Dec 21 2009 10:26 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I wish Klapisch would throw himself into a well, Baby Jessica style. Sans the rescue effort.

Ashie62 Dec 21 2009 11:09 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Centerfield":2uksok70]There are so many contradictions in that article it's not even worth doing a point-by-point dismantling. Everyone put down their pens. We now have the dumbest article ever written. Thanks for playing.[/quote:2uksok70] Can't let these articles rent any room in my head

metirish Dec 21 2009 12:33 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

This just bothers the hell out of me.....Tim Kurkjian in his selection for his ALL-Decade Team has some fine picks....Kent at 2nd base is great I think.....but what gets me about his SS pick is not just that it's Jeter it's the stupid line at the end. He batted .317 in the 2000s and finished in the top 5 in the league in hitting in 2000, '03, '06 and '09. His 1,940 hits were the second most in the decade behind Ichiro's 2,030. He won four Gold Gloves, and two World Series rings. And as important as all the numbers, he ran hard to first base on every play of the decade. Did he really , I can't think of the specific games but I've seen him not run hard to first more than a few times and that's just watching him every now and then.... http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/s ... id=4753935

Vic Sage Dec 21 2009 12:49 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

well, you know what they say about sports writing... A myth is as good as some bile

metirish Dec 23 2009 07:08 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Seriously, how predictable is Herper? The print edition has this headline for his article Cash takes cuts, Omar goes down swinging Online Edition Brian Cashman lands Javier Vazquez for New York Yankees as New York Mets still silent Javier Vazquez has never quite lived up to the hype, going back to the first time the Yankees traded for him, six years ago. In that 2004 season there was some feeling in the Bronx that Vazquez lacked toughness, but this time around he is not expected to be an ace, and fits perfectly toward the back of the rotation. So the Yankees made another smart trade here, again taking advantage of a team looking to deal a player for financial reasons. They plucked Vazquez from the Braves much the way they did Curtis Granderson from the Tigers, without giving up vital pieces of their present or future. Melky Cabrera got his share of pie-in-the-face hits last season, to be sure, but as a left fielder with moderate power he's much less valuable than he was roaming center. And while Johnny Damon still seems like the best fit for left field, GM Brian Cashman can sign cost-efficient Mark DeRosa if he wants and take bows for a nice offseason, now that he has deepened his rotation and created flexibility for either Joba Chamberlain or Phil Hughes to pitch out of the bullpen. All of which begs the question: Isn't this the type of creative dealing the Mets should be doing? Or is it simply that they are in denial about their need to upgrade their pitching to have any real chance at contending next season? Vazquez and Edwin Jackson are each better than any free-agent pitcher still available, and if the Mets may not have been able to offer anyone such as Max Scherzer, the power arm the Tigers acquired from the Diamondbacks for Jackson, they surely had enough to pry Vazquez away from the Braves. Maybe the Braves wouldn't have wanted to trade Vazquez in their division, but it's not like he's John Smoltz, with a history there. More than likely they just wanted the best deal in return for dumping $11 million off their payroll. In any case, this was a Yankee trade that focused still more attention on the inactivity of the Mets, and, at the very least, created more uncertainty as to whether they'll ever sign Jason Bay. Cashman, after all, said Tuesday that he has no intention of paying big bucks for a left fielder, but Mets fans - and for that matter, a lot of people in baseball - will believe that only when Bay and Matt Holliday are signed elsewhere. Then there was the talk Tuesday that the Braves may have unloaded Vazquez to free up money to make a run at Bay. They do seem to need a big bat to be serious contenders again, and probably wouldn't have a hard time finding a taker for Cabrera should they want to trade him now as part of their plan to pursue Bay. In other words, this was another day of torture for Mets fans, another reason to fear the worst from this offseason. Maybe Bay and his agent are just trying to squeeze that fifth year out of this contract, but the longer they go without taking the Mets' offer, the more reason there is to believe they're looking for another place to play. In the meantime, while there are still plenty of second-tier pitchers on the market, it's puzzling that the Mets don't seem to have any sense of urgency about acquiring pitching. More than once this offseason GM Omar Minaya has talked as if last year never happened for Mike Pelfrey, Oliver Perez and John Maine, and they can be counted on as a reliable No. 2-3-4 behind Johan Santana. It could happen. But it's a huge leap of faith after last season. And so while Vazquez still has to prove he's more than a pitcher whose win-loss record rarely seems to be as good as his other numbers, right now he'd qualify as the Mets' second-best starter. Instead the Yankees say thank you to the Braves and tuck him nicely into the No. 4 spot, perhaps even No. 5. It's that kind of offseason. The rich get richer. The Mets get nothing. jharper@nydailynews.com

Benjamin Grimm Dec 23 2009 07:16 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="John Harper"]In other words, this was another day of torture for Mets fans...

This is, of course, stupid. I wasn't the least bit "tortured" by this trade, nor by the fact that another day has gone by without Jason Bay signing his name on the dotted line. But we (meaning the community of Mets fans) are partly to blame for this nonsense. There are so many fans that wear their angst on their sleeves that the perception that we're "tortured" or "suffering" does have some basis in fact.


I do agree with this next part, though:

[quote="John Harper"]In the meantime, while there are still plenty of second-tier pitchers on the market, it's puzzling that the Mets don't seem to have any sense of urgency about acquiring pitching. More than once this offseason GM Omar Minaya has talked as if last year never happened for Mike Pelfrey, Oliver Perez and John Maine, and they can be counted on as a reliable No. 2-3-4 behind Johan Santana.

It could happen. But it's a huge leap of faith after last season.

As the guys like Marquis and Wolf come off the market, the Mets will have fewer and fewer options available to them, and I think they desperately need another starter. I have more faith that their offense will bounce back (with Beltran and Reyes returning, and, hopefully Wright getting his shit together) than in the pitching. This plan that they have, to focus on the offense and then deal with the pitching may seriously backfire on them, especially if Bay continues to string them along into January.

Edgy DC Dec 23 2009 07:22 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

In any case, this was a Yankee trade that focused still more attention on the inactivity of the Mets, and, at the very least, created more uncertainty as to whether they'll ever sign Jason Bay. This trade had nothing to do with Jason Bay. The only thing it has to do with the Mets is that columnists like to stoke petty jealousies. Fuck the offseason. I'm ready to go to war. On Ollie! On Pelfrey! On Mainer!

metirish Dec 23 2009 08:02 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Per Metsblog Yesterday, on WFAN, Mike Francesa said, ‘The Mets need to make a splash, for the sake of making a splash, to let people know they’re relevant again.’ As big a splash as Mike would make if he jumped in to a pool?

Edgy DC Dec 23 2009 08:10 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

The one having a problem staying relevant is Francesa.

MFS62 Dec 23 2009 08:46 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Edgy DC":200ubx5e] Fuck the offseason. I'm ready to go to war. On Ollie! On Pelfrey! On Mainer![/quote:200ubx5e] We're ready to fight. You, too, Brian Stokes! Let's re-sign Brandon Knight. ...... (your serve) Later

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 23 2009 10:27 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Benjamin Grimm"] John Harper wrote: In other words, this was another day of torture for Mets fans... This is, of course, stupid. I wasn't the least bit "tortured" by this trade, nor by the fact that another day has gone by without Jason Bay signing his name on the dotted line. But we (meaning the community of Mets fans) are partly to blame for this nonsense. There are so many fans that wear their angst on their sleeves that the perception that we're "tortured" or "suffering" does have some basis in fact.

Is it weird to admit I WAS a little cheesed* when I first saw this trade on the ticker? Partly because it was a savvy move by Cashman, and partly because I thought teams were past this whole Melky-is-worth-something business**.

*Quietly, and with dignity. Like, say, a nice Gloucester.
** The big qualification to this being that Arodys Vizcaino, was not more than a spur-Rodys on my prospect map.

Fman99 Dec 23 2009 10:32 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I love to believe that Javy the MFY redux will go about as well as the first version (4.91 ERA).

Ashie62 Dec 23 2009 10:42 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Edgy DC":3t373f4p]The one having a problem staying relevant is Francesa.[/quote:3t373f4p] He is relevant if people respond to him

Edgy DC Dec 23 2009 10:57 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Well, here's hoping that folks are tuning out in droves.

Ashie62 Dec 24 2009 02:38 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Price of the shnooze puts out the 10 worst Mets moments this decade with glee..I found the link on www.cbssportsline.com for anyone who want to look. He put Estes #1

Edgy DC Dec 28 2009 12:51 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Let's draw the most damning conclusion possible from an aside. http://nymag.com/daily/sports/2009/12/o ... it_if.html

Ashie62 Dec 28 2009 03:15 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Either Omar was misquoted,taken out of context or the Wilpons need to be very afraid. Consider Omar was sighted at the NJ Nets-Minn T Wolves game at Izod..The 2 worst teams in the NBA.. He may be short of braincells..

metsguyinmichigan Dec 28 2009 03:28 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Tim Marchman of SI never fails to disappoint: [url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/tim_marchman/12/28/hot.stove.mets/index.html "Take the Mets, a rich, lousy team that has made an ostentatious show of being willing to spend a lot to improve. With more than $90 million committed for next year before figuring arbitration awards for several young players, the team lacks a catcher, a first baseman, two outfielders and the semblance of dignity. Every one of their starters is inexperienced, terrible, coming off an injury or some combination of the three. They might be able to get better by signing the owners of Shea Stadium, the Brooklyn recording studio named after their erstwhile, much-mourned ballpark." Idiot.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 28 2009 03:47 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

To be fair: SANTANA: Injury MAINE: Injury PEREZ: Terrible/Injury PELFREY: Sorta-Terrible PARNELL: Inexperienced NIEVE: Injury/Inexperienced NIESE: Injury/Inexperienced The Mets seem to bring out the irrational in Marchman, who generally produces tight, fact-based analyses... which are well-argued and -phrased, too. He was an obsessive Met fan before he was a pro, which would explain the frustration/ad team-inem stuff.

86-Dreamer Dec 28 2009 04:17 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Marchman's first paragraph takes a couple of cheap shots, but is not too far off on the currrent state of the Mets starting lineup. Later on in the article, he argues that despite the mess they are in, they are probably doing the right thing by not throwing money at less than ideal solutions. Overall, I think it is a decent article. Regarding his point about every starter being "inexperienced, terrible, coming off injury or some combination of the three": SP Santana - coming off injury (accurate) SP Maine - coming off injury (accurate) SP Pelfrey - some may say terrible, but not I. (poor argument) SP Perez - injured and terrible may be a complement based on 2009 (accurate) SP Nieve/Dickey/Figgy/Niesse - you could apply one of those to each of these (accurate) 1b Murphy - not injured. has some experience. close to terrible relative to what you expect out of 1B. (good argument) 2b Castillo - experienced. does not look healthy, but says he is. terrible? stats say no buy eyes say yes .... (good argument) SS Reyes – injured (accurate) 3B - Wright – None of these apply (Unfair) LF - Pagan – currently healthy, but often injured (good argument) CF – Beltran - coming off injury (accurate) RF – Frenchy – nice guy, strong arm, decent finish to season. But, last few years have been pretty terrible (good argument) C - Terrible. (accurate) So I would say for 7 of 13 starting positions, Marchman’s statement is accurate, and that he has a good argument for 4 others. Only 1 is completely inaccurate/unfair.

Ashie62 Dec 28 2009 04:19 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="86-Dreamer":3blbj3xx]Marchman's first paragraph takes a couple of cheap shots, but is not too far off on the currrent state of the Mets starting lineup. Later on in the article, he argues that despite the mess they are in, they are probably doing the right thing by not throwing money at less than ideal solutions. Overall, I think it is a decent article. Regarding his point about every starter being "inexperienced, terrible, coming off injury or some combination of the three": SP Santana - coming off injury (accurate) SP Maine - coming off injury (accurate) SP Pelfrey - some may say terrible, but not I. (poor argument) SP Perez - injured and terrible may be a complement based on 2009 (accurate) SP Nieve/Dickey/Figgy/Niesse - you could apply one of those to each of these (accurate) 1b Murphy - not injured. has some experience. close to terrible relative to what you expect out of 1B. (good argument) 2b Castillo - experienced. does not look healthy, but says he is. terrible? stats say no buy eyes say yes .... (good argument) SS Reyes – injured (accurate) 3B - Wright – None of these apply (Unfair) LF - Pagan – currently healthy, but often injured (good argument) CF – Beltran - coming off injury (accurate) RF – Frenchy – nice guy, strong arm, decent finish to season. But, last few years have been pretty terrible (good argument) C - Terrible. (accurate) So I would say for 7 of 13 starting positions, Marchman’s statement is accurate, and that he has a good argument for 4 others. Only 1 is completely inaccurate/unfair.[/quote:3blbj3xx] Thank you..

metirish Dec 28 2009 05:13 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I like Marchman, used to like him when he was at the Post and the NY Sun...

Edgy DC Dec 28 2009 06:30 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

He (and any of youse who would agree with him) is dead wrong about pretending December 27 is any sort of meaningful time to draw conclusions. Come on.

Ashie62 Dec 28 2009 07:02 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Edgy DC":1l2m3vjc]He (and any of youse who would agree with him) is dead wrong about pretending December 27 is any sort of meaningful time to draw conclusions. Come on.[/quote:1l2m3vjc] You asked for conclusions

Edgy DC Dec 28 2009 07:07 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

That's regarding another story --- and you're failing, seemingly deliberately, to recognize irony. But I guess you're dealing your own, at my expense. The thing about that Marchman article is that he ends up more or less defending the team after taking a few rounds of cheap shots at them.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 28 2009 10:28 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Edgy DC":4l5kf2zu]That's regarding another story --- and you're failing, seemingly deliberately, to recognize irony. But I guess you're dealing your own, at my expense. The thing about that Marchman article is that he ends up more or less defending the team after taking a few rounds of cheap shots at them.[/quote:4l5kf2zu] Not unlike a good number of forum denizens I know.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 29 2009 07:01 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Apparently Mike Francesa is promising to break a major story concerning the Mets on his show today: http://bases.nbcsports.com/2009/12/a-ma ... y.html.php My guess is that he's going to rip Omar and the Wilpons. The "story" will be his opinion, not any player move that the Mets will make. That's why I posted this in this thread, with Mike being the douchebag in question.

Edgy DC Dec 29 2009 07:08 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

My guess: he's found a rat to squeal on Mike Piazza. I mean, it couldn't be any current story, right? Because the team is crawling floor to ceiling with real reporters. It's got to be something from the past regarding somebody who needs exposure who threw the "breaking story" in his lap.

metirish Dec 29 2009 07:18 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 29 2009 07:27 AM

Oh man, Fat Mike lording it over his minions , you know they are holding on the phone even now to tell him how great he no matter the big breaking event..... Wilpons selling the team?

Frayed Knot Dec 29 2009 07:26 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Any real "breaking" story wouldn't be sat on for 24 hours (particularly with this leak-happy front office) - which means this will more likely fall under the category of "announcement" rather than earth-shattering event. - I'm guessing plans will be revealed for the NYM HoF or some other such stadium-related news ? Oodles of Met fans will, of course, take this tease as a promise of a major FA signing, massive trade, front office reshuffling, and/or (their real wet dream) team sale and proceed to use the lack of 'bigness' of the real actual announcement to claim victim status as they were - once again - lied to, over-sold, and mis-led.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 29 2009 07:43 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

My guess is that the egomaniac will be spouting his "well-considered" opinions (with plenty of repetition, of course) and he naturally thinks of that as a major story. Whatever it is, the one thing I'm sure of is that I won't be listening. In the unlikely event that Francesa is breaking any news of importance, I know I'll hear about it soon enough.

Centerfield Dec 29 2009 07:58 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

This is in the wrong thread. This thread is for "Douchebag Journalists". The Francesa posts should be moved to the "Douchebag" thread.

MFS62 Dec 29 2009 09:21 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I'm guessing it will be something about the WFAN coverage of the team. Maybe a new voice in the radio booth bracketing or during games. Or, (and it is being presented as an "update") the Mets are out of the hunt for Bay. Later

Edgy DC Dec 29 2009 09:24 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Really, though, if the scoop was a transaction --- or non-transaction, as you suggest --- wouldn't telegraphing half a day ahead that you're sitting on a scoop guarantee somebody beats you to it. Your first suggestion has merit --- a change in the broadcast lineup. That's a "scoop" that the station would place in his hands. I'm thinking somebody is dropping a tell-all book and he has the first interview.

Ashie62 Dec 29 2009 09:38 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I have little doubt the fatass will do a hatchet job on the Mets and specifically Omar. On the other end....the signing of Aroldis Chapman...

Edgy DC Dec 29 2009 09:40 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Chapman's got a steep motivation to sign with somebody soon and very soon: http://bases.nbcsports.com/2009/12/arol ... y.html.php

Frayed Knot Dec 29 2009 10:30 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

[quote="Ashie62":2xm1bc5m]I have little doubt the fatass will do a hatchet job on the Mets and specifically Omar.[/quote:2xm1bc5m] If anything, Francesa has been fairly easy on Omar over the years and frequently uses him, cites him, and quotes him as a source of info.

Centerfield Dec 29 2009 11:23 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Anyone listening? We should know by now.

Ashie62 Dec 29 2009 11:26 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I'm watching..Fatass is ranting about Rex Ryan at the moment

Ashie62 Dec 29 2009 11:32 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Fatass has run out of wind reaming the Jets and I hope the Mets are up after the break. Fatass is hard to take

bmfc1 Dec 30 2009 06:26 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseb ... chers.html Harper's at it again. I bet he's not even working. He wrote a generic column in case the Mets signed a FA and told the editor to fill in the blanks: "if they sign a hitter, then I'll rip them for not getting a pitcher and if they sign a pitcher, then I'll rip them for not getting a hitter."

Ashie62 Dec 30 2009 07:02 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

The only part of the article I agree with is Omar may be relying on Pelf,Ollie and Maine too much Beyond that this putz has the Mets possibly finishing fourth and is babbling about "mounting pressure' on the Mets to be more active..

Edgy DC Dec 30 2009 07:04 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

I guess I missed the part where he swallows his words. Of course, they could still finish in fourth. That's a reality no matter how things break in the offseason.

MFS62 Dec 30 2009 07:20 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

While we're awaiting the official Bay signing, let's not forget to wish a hale and hearty FUCK YOU to Peter Gammons for writing the Bay would rather go to Beiruit than to the Mets. (linked somewhere else in the forum) Later

Benjamin Grimm Dec 30 2009 07:24 AM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Well, technically, we don't know that Gammons was wrong. Since there was no team in Beirut offering Bay a contract, we'll never know for sure what his preference would have been.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 30 2009 12:58 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Dec 30 2009 01:07 PM

[quote="Benjamin Grimm"]Since there was no team in Beirut offering Bay a contract...

Au contraire. But they wouldn't budge on a fifth year.




From the otherwise solid Jeff Passan:

All of this highlights an endemic problem with the Mets that they try to cover with their payrolls, which provided among the highest cost per win in baseball this past decade: Their player-development system is a mess, and not the kind of mess a toddler makes at dinner. It is whole-cafeteria-food-fight bad, and in that respect, the coupling of Minaya and the Mets seems perfectly matrimonious. Together, they have spent hundreds of millions to go backward... Wright and Reyes represent the only worthwhile thing the Mets can call their own. Since 1985, the Mets have signed and developed five players who later wore their uniforms in an All-Star game. Five. Wright, Reyes, Todd Hundley, Edgardo Alfonzo(notes) and Bobby Jones. Even Kansas City can say it has passed eight homegrown All-Stars through its system. That Jones symbolizes the Mets’ ability to develop pitching is indeed harrowing, particularly when examining their 40-man roster today. Only 12 of the players have been Mets their whole career, and just five pitchers: Mike Pelfrey(notes), Bobby Parnell(notes), Jon Niese, Eddie Kunz(notes) and Tobi Stoner(notes). Not exactly Seaver, Ryan and Koosman.

Some of the criticisms in the piece are kindasorta accurate, but he neglects to mention here that each of those pitchers came up in the last 1-2 years, belieing his point that the org is headed in the wrong direction.

Then again, the MFYs have 23 homegrowns on their 40-man at present.

Then again AGAIN, he did write this less than a week ago:

Boston understands value. Its proprietary formulas say something like what all of the publicly available metrics affirm: Holliday is one of the most valuable everyday players in the game, and Bay’s bat is a mighty force. And when assigning a dollar amount to their valuations, the Red Sox are saying: Right now, Holliday and Bay are incredible bargains.

Edgy DC Dec 30 2009 01:05 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Since 1985? Give me breakage. First of all, Wright and Reyes aren't a "thing." They are two discrete beautiful things. Second of all, not wearing a Mets uniform in the All-Star Game doesn't necessarily mean they haven't developed people. It oft means they developed and traded people. While Kansas City is absolutely forced to get those first six years out of everybody they can, the Mets are playing a different game. The fact that Preston Wilson and Heath Bell (signed as undrafted free agent, yo) wore other team's unis in the All Star game can be demerited against their trade policy, but not their development policy.

Nymr83 Dec 30 2009 02:34 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

Even Kansas City can say it has passed eight homegrown All-Stars through its system how many would have made the AS game at all without the "1 per team" rule?

Edgy DC Dec 30 2009 07:54 PM Re: Douchebag Journalists

2008 Joakim Soria (legit All Star, originally signed by Dodgers, but no other MLB experience) 2007 Gil Meche (modestly legit All Star, originally signed by Seattle) 2006 Mark Redman (token pick, originally signed by Minnesota) 2005 Mike Sweeney (token pick, home grown, #1) 2004 Ken Harvey (definite token pick, home grown, #2) 2003 Mike MacDougal (probably a token pick, home grown, #3) Mike Sweeney (token pick, home grown, #1a) (I guess one of these guys was selected and got hurt, because neither has a strong case for himself otherwise) 2002 Mike Sweeney (legit All Star, home grown) 2001 Mike Sweeney (legit All Star, home grown) 2000 Jermaine Dye (legit All Star --- starter even --- originally signed by Atlanta) Mike F. Sweeney (legit All Star, home grown) So, going back the last ten years, I show three guys that are disqualified by Nymr's standards, although one is reddemed because he did make it legitimately in his first two appearances. So that's two. Somebody take it back another ten years. By the way, two questions 1) What's wrong with Beltran? 2) Do you ever think of Mike Sweeney and go, "Mike Sweeney... now there's a five-time All-Star"?