Master Index of Archived Threads
We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 09:05 AM Edited 4 time(s), most recently on May 25 2010 11:51 AM |
We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not Picky.
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 09:11 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
The pre-game JoePet:
|
Gwreck May 25 2010 09:11 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
R.A. Dickey vs. Jamie Moyer.
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 09:17 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
|
Is Phillies-Mets a Rivalry Again?
|
MFS62 May 25 2010 09:19 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="Gwreck":1cxm391x]R.A. Dickey vs. Jamie Moyer.
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 25 2010 09:23 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Gimme the unner.
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 09:24 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Knuckle Sandwich to the face of any sign stealer.
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 09:45 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 09:51 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM Edited 3 time(s), most recently on May 25 2010 11:54 AM |
|
MFS62 May 25 2010 09:51 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Barajas and Blanco were seen flipping a coin. The loser gets to catch tonight.
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 09:58 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM Edited 4 time(s), most recently on May 25 2010 12:51 PM |
|
In May of 1976, SI ran a feature story on NL premier HR hitters Mike Schmidt and Dave Kingman. Schmidt snagged the cover while Kingman's portrayal was, at times, less than flattering. Kingman, sensing that he was depicted as Schmidt's inferior, responded by shunning the press:
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 10:21 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Unlfattering photo comparison. Kingman outs and Schmidt clouts:
|
Zvon May 25 2010 10:31 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="batmagadanleadoff"]We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not Picky. |
Zvon May 25 2010 10:50 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
excellent article batmag.
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 25 2010 11:00 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
A REMINDER:
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 11:30 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
|
The end of an era.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket May 25 2010 12:30 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
That SI article was just great. I mean, the whole idea seems a little whacky today (batting average and strikeouts are prolly way overstated) but the tone and material is just magic. The lede, the Kraneoool quote, an athlete opening up like Scmidtty does here you just don't see anywhere anymore.
|
metirish May 25 2010 12:43 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
|
Some great quotes in there.
Davey
|
bmfc1 May 25 2010 01:19 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 25 2010 02:01 PM |
METS:
|
bmfc1 May 25 2010 01:19 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
NewYorkMets
|
TransMonk May 25 2010 01:33 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
From Cincy to Baltimore to the Mets...looks like a special project of Wayne Krivsky.
|
G-Fafif May 25 2010 01:54 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="TransMonk":24diqym0]From Cincy to Baltimore to the Mets...looks like a special project of Wayne Krivsky.[/quote:24diqym0]
|
Edgy DC May 25 2010 02:11 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
|
Ashie62 May 25 2010 03:13 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
I believe in Batmags!!!!
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 25 2010 03:23 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
BETTER KNOW THE ENEMY?
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 04:35 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Herr-Plunk
|
Zvon May 25 2010 05:16 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Nice opening half.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 05:27 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Reyes makes it happen.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 05:29 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Aw shit.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 05:31 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 25 2010 05:32 PM |
It was his left elbow.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket May 25 2010 05:32 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
He's tough. That's why his folks named him R.A. (Remarkable Athlete)
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket May 25 2010 05:34 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Actually they named him after a Utopia album:
|
Zvon May 25 2010 05:35 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
lol.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 05:37 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
ooooh, nice.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 05:40 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
If every inning is gonna be like that I'm gonna have to put on a diaper.
|
Ashie62 May 25 2010 05:47 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Time for RBI'S Frenchy
|
Ashie62 May 25 2010 05:50 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
JACKPOT
|
Zvon May 25 2010 05:55 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Frenchy makes me smile.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket May 25 2010 05:56 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Building a picket fence, I like it.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket May 25 2010 05:58 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Oh my, it was strike 3. Motherfucker
|
Zvon May 25 2010 05:59 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Shane didn't touch that pitch!
|
Zvon May 25 2010 06:08 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
whew.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 06:13 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
They just showed a shot (Phils broadcast) of Dickey being treated on that elbow in the dugout,
|
Zvon May 25 2010 06:22 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
If I was a Phillie I'd run to 1st on every swinging 3rd strike just in case.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 06:26 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Victorino loses Wrights pop up in the dusk and Davey doubles!
|
Swan Swan H May 25 2010 06:30 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Can Frenchy go deux pour deux?
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 25 2010 06:32 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
A little more Frenching, and it's 5-0.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 06:33 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
I'll take the sac fly.
|
bmfc1 May 25 2010 06:35 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Dickey is listed as 6-2. Really?
|
Zvon May 25 2010 06:41 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Castillo has given Reyes two perfect feeds on possible DP grounders tonight.
|
Nymr83 May 25 2010 06:44 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
stop trying to bunt!!
|
Chad Ochoseis May 25 2010 06:59 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
The Mets store at CF has them. Don't know where else they're available.
|
Swan Swan H May 25 2010 07:16 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Je m'appelle Jeff Francoeur. Je ne suck pas pour une nuit.
|
bmfc1 May 25 2010 07:19 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
It was great to get that 5th run but Dickey could have pitched the 7th.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 07:29 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
great play on both sides of that!
|
Swan Swan H May 25 2010 07:29 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Valdes pitches himself into and right back out of trouble, thanks to Ks of Muttley and Howard and a pretty diving play by Wright.
|
metirish May 25 2010 07:30 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="Nymr83":3i0nw75s]stop trying to bunt!!
|
bmfc1 May 25 2010 07:44 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Welcome back Nelson.
|
Swan Swan H May 25 2010 07:47 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
You think they would have skipped the commercial and shown the scoreboard video tribute to Figueroa instead.
|
metirish May 25 2010 07:48 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="bmfc1":kqf5t5ql]Welcome back Nelson.
|
Swan Swan H May 25 2010 07:51 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Holy Mother of Koo! Valdes burns Werth for a double so deep that Throb scores from first.
|
Nymr83 May 25 2010 07:52 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
YEAH VALDES, PHUCK PHILLY!!
|
bmfc1 May 25 2010 07:53 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
The Mets are enjoying the vibe of Nelson's pitching.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 07:53 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
wow!
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 25 2010 07:53 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Tasty slice of Koo, Cuban.
|
Nymr83 May 25 2010 07:55 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
ahahahaha take that mother fuckers!!!
|
Swan Swan H May 25 2010 08:05 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
R.A. Dickey and Raul Valdes combine to shut out the Phillies. Just how it was laid out coming out of Spring Training.
|
Nymr83 May 25 2010 08:09 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="metirish":zhqwssax][quote="Nymr83":zhqwssax]stop trying to bunt!!
|
Frayed Knot May 25 2010 08:17 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Maybe the best played game all year.
|
Zvon May 25 2010 08:45 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="Frayed Knot"]... we took advantage of every situation ... |
Rockin' Doc May 25 2010 08:53 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
|
Ashie62 May 25 2010 09:00 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Too sweet for words
|
Gwreck May 25 2010 09:04 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Excellent game and great company to take it in with (thanks for the ticket, KC). Very happy to see the Mets putting runs on the board almost every inning (6 of 8).
|
G-Fafif May 25 2010 09:13 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Beautiful night. Beautiful game. Beautiful win. Beautiful setting. Beautiful Blue Point Toasted Lager. Beautiful wife (whose work outing I tagged along on) who volunteered to get me the beautiful Blue Point Toasted Lager, available only at Catch of the Day, which we were sitting diametrically opposed from on Promenade.
|
Edgy DC May 25 2010 09:25 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Overtimin' Edgy tonight. Promised myself not to keep up with game.
|
Ceetar May 25 2010 09:48 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="G-Fafif":swos8fgk]Beautiful night. Beautiful game. Beautiful win. Beautiful setting. Beautiful Blue Point Toasted Lager. Beautiful wife (whose work outing I tagged along on) who volunteered to get me the beautiful Blue Point Toasted Lager, available only at Catch of the Day, which we were sitting diametrically opposed from on Promenade.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket May 25 2010 10:08 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Wasn't nothin that didn't go right tonight. HUGE props due to Valdes; we all thought that game was destined to jump the shark when they had Utley, Howard etc up with 2nd & 3rd, no out.
|
batmagadanleadoff May 25 2010 10:15 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="G-Fafif":1t1hcstz]
|
Edgy DC May 25 2010 10:32 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
This might have been the previous standard-bearer in Mets history.
|
Edgy DC May 25 2010 10:37 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Wow! Sturdivant, Moorhead, and Springer were 0-5 among them. Dickey's the first of his kind.
|
MFS62 May 26 2010 07:48 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
The amazing thing is that now that Dickey seems to have finally mastered the pitch, he could pitch until he is as old as Moyer is today. (Although he feels a lot older after the Mets hit him for 5 runs last night)
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 26 2010 10:42 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Additional weirdness: Raul Valdes is now 4-for-7 on the season in 9 PAs (two sacs). He's hitting/OBPing .571, and slugging .714.
|
Gwreck May 26 2010 11:48 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
He's too tired to pitch tonight so I say we put him ahead of Gary Matthews Jr. on the PH-depth chart.
|
Benjamin Grimm May 26 2010 12:07 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
If Oliver Perez can't get an inning in a game like this, when IS he going to pitch?
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 26 2010 12:11 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Perhaps GWreck (not to mention a nation of dozens behind him) is getting his wish.
|
Nymr83 May 26 2010 12:19 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="Benjamin Grimm":tw8a8puw]If Oliver Perez can't get an inning in a game like this, when IS he going to pitch?
|
Ceetar May 26 2010 12:20 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]Perhaps GWreck (not to mention a nation of dozens behind him) is getting his wish. |
Edgy DC May 26 2010 12:21 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
I'm certainly not going to criticize Jerry for not unnecessarily going deeper into his pen.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket May 26 2010 12:29 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
We would have seen Ollie probably, had Valdes not sacked up bigtime there in the 7th.
|
Ceetar May 26 2010 12:33 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="John Cougar Lunchbucket":2au5vhoc]We would have seen Ollie probably, had Valdes not sacked up bigtime there in the 7th.
|
Zvon May 26 2010 05:10 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="Benjamin Grimm":1seegbtk]If Oliver Perez can't get an inning in a game like this, when IS he going to pitch?
|
Edgy DC May 26 2010 07:01 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Nothing personal, but you guys is insane.
|
batmagadanleadoff May 27 2010 10:50 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="batmagadanleadoff"]Unlfattering photo comparison. Kingman outs and Schmidt clouts: |
Well, the new Hardball Times Baseball Annual is out, and of course it has all sorts of good stuff even if they did go slumming this year and have me write up a little essay. Fortunately, there are all kinds of other great things in there -- Rob Neyer talking about the greatest mid-season acquisitions ever, Craig Calcaterra on the Mitchell Report, Craig Brown on Pete Rose the free agent, well, I can't list all of the stories. I will say that one of the most fascinating bits in there is about Dodger Stadium and how it's actually an excellent home run park ... if you are a home run hitter. Interesting stuff. You should check it out. One of my favorite pieces in there was written by John Walsh. It's called The Sweet Taste of Revenge. Walsh basically wanted to answer the question: Do batters hit better after they have been dissed? That is, do hitters outperform themselves when someone is intentionally walked in front of them? In a way, I think that he was asking: Is anger a positive emotion in baseball? Or: Does motivation make someone a better hitter? The whole article is excellent and the conclusions are interesting, but I'm not going to go into those -- you need to buy the book. No, the point here is that the study made me think a little bit more about one of my favorite players: Dave Kingman. I readily admit that I am disturbingly fascinated by Dave Kingman -- more fascinated than anyone should be about a man who famously sent a live rat to a reporter. Mostly it comes down to my theory: I think Kingman could have been a great player, only it seems to me he did not particularly want to be a great player. My main proof for this is the 1979 baseball season. Kingman was playing for the Chicago Cubs that year. And I had always heard that in the months before that season, Kingman decided he finally would show everyone just how great he could be if he actually tried. Up to that point Kingman had been one of the most absurd players in baseball history -- he hit a lot of home runs, he struck out an obscene number of times, he got hurt a lot, he only played defense in the loosest definition of the word and he was traded and waived three times in the same year (and released at the end of that year). He also seemed to have a unique ability to make everybody really despise him. Dave Kingman (1971-78): .232/.299/.485, 204 homers, 110 errors, 964 Ks in 3052 at-bats. Now look, you would need a whole team of psychiatrists to figure out what happened to Dave Kingman. He was a remarkable athlete. He actually began his college career as a pitcher at USC and he had a very strong arm throughout most of his big league career. He was 6-foot-6, he was freakishly strong*, and in his younger days he could run. In 1972, his first full year with the San Francisco Giants, he hit 29 homers in 472 at-bats -- sixth in the National League -- he stole 16 bases, he was not yet unwilling to draw walks, and according to news reports of the time he even showed some defensive promise at third base. He was just 23. *In 1994, when the Cincinnati Bengals were a struggling football team -- good thing that has changed -- they drafted Dan Wilkinson, a defensive tackle out of Ohio State with the first pick in the draft. As soon as Wilkinson was drafted (and people started sacrilegiously calling him "Big Daddy"), the strength coach announced that Wilkinson was "freakishly strong." We would often talk about the meaning of that bold quote in the press box when watching him get shoved around. How could this happen to a man of freakish strength? Could it be that other teams had offensive linemen who were freakishly stronger? Mutantly strong? Whimsically strong? Or was Wilkinson's freakish strength only observable in non-football ways -- could Wilkinson, say, pick up school busses? Could he tear the doors off of refrigerators? Could he lift a sled with all of the presents and food in Whoville?** It remained a mystery. After a while, Wilkinson called Cincinnati a racist city and got himself traded to Washington, where he played for some years and was released, signed with Detroit, played for two years and was released, signed with Miami, played one year and then could not be located when the Dolphins wanted to trade him. So they released him. **Meaning he would have the strength of 10 Grinches, plus two. It's hard to say what happened then. Maybe it was his personality -- Kingman, by all indications, did not like people. I've always suspected he did not like baseball either -- or at least many parts of baseball. I think he liked hitting 500-foot home runs. It was the other stuff that seemed to bore him or irritate him or whatever. He just did not seem wired for a game that demanded he play well with others and pay attention when he was not swinging for the fences and perform for fans who seemed to demand quite a lot for the price of their ticket. Kingman talked often about fishing; that was the sport that suited his temperament. He could do it alone. And if he had a bad day, he would eat sandwiches. But maybe there were other things involved beyond Kingman's personality quirks. It seems to me that the Giants turned on him fast. I don't know all the details, of course, but it seems to me that 1972 was a year to build on -- instead, Kingman started '73 on the bench, was mostly a pinch-runner or pinch-hitter. Twice the Giants put him in games to pitch. That does not seem like a team that had much faith in a man's talents. In 1973 Kingman did many of the good things he had done in '72 -- he hit 24 homers in 305 at-bats and he was still walking at a pretty good rate -- but you could see that his game was beginning to deteriorate. He struck out 122 times in those 305 at-bats. His defense at third base very suddenly went tragic. Kingman might or might not have responded any better to a positive environment -- no one will know -- but clearly the Giants and Kingman brought out the worst in each other. After an even more frustrating season in '74, the Giants sold Kingman to the Mets for $150,000. And in New York the much-publicized Dave Kingman character came out -- here was the moody Kingman who swung hard at everything, who almost never walked, who pulled everything, who hit 500-foot home runs and 325-foot pop-ups, who ran the bases like a child coming in for dinner, who played defense not just poorly but with utter disdain. He did mash 36 and 37 home runs his two full years with the Mets, and Shea was a terrible hitters park. Those home runs seemed to be the only things that intrigued him at all about baseball. In '77 the Mets traded him, the Padres waived him, the Angels traded him and the Yankees let him go.* *It's worth noting that the Yankees were only up 2.5 games when they traded Randy Stein and cash for for Kingman on Sept. 15 of '77. Kong banged home runs in each of his first two games -- both victories -- and hit four homers in eight games as the Yankees held on and went on to win the World Series. The Yankees still didn't want him back. All of which takes us back to 1979, and this new attitude from Dave Kingman. "Man it sure would be fun to get a full year of baseball in," he told reporters during Cubs spring training that year. And this: "I'm working on a lot of things I've never worked on before." He talked about hitting the ball the other way. He talked about focusing more on each at bat. He talked about staying healthy. He talked about wanting to show people something. Then Kingman went on to have four amazing months. Here were Kingman's numbers through 85 games: 307 at-bats, 67 runs, 94 hits, 35 homers, 79 RBIs, .306/.378/.691 Now, sure, there have been better stretches than that in baseball history, but I suspect none by a player with the pedigree of Dave Kingman. To give you an idea about that .691 slugging percentage -- it was a few points higher than Mickey Mantle's slugging percentage in 1961. It was unreal. Now, true, some of this was because of the hitting-convenience of Wrigley Field -- he hit 315 at Wrigley that season -- but much of it just seemed to be Kingman making the point that, sure, if he wanted to be a great player, if such things actually interested him, then he could do that. He proved the point even more convincingly on July 27 and 28 of that season, when he faced the Mets, one of his former teams. Kingman never did say publicly that he wanted to get back at the Mets for trading him or mistreating him or whatever. On a Friday night, though, he hit two home runs against them. On Saturday he hit three more. Anyway, he cooled off the last couple months of the 1979 season -- he still ended up with by far his best season, a massive offensive season really. He hit .288/.343/.613 with 48 homers and 115 RBIs. He led the league in OPS, which is pretty telling because he never before or since finished in the Top FIFTEEN in OPS in either league. He had made his statement. Kingman had injuries in 1980, and by '81 he was back to being the same old Dave Kingman. I don't know if it's right, but I always had this theory that Kingman had proved his point, and he grew bored again. He just went back to bashing a bunch of of home runs -- that seemed the be the one thing he liked doing. You know Kingman hit 35 home runs the last season of his career -- that's a record, most homers for a final season. It's a telling record: Usually someone who hits 35 home runs will be brought back by some team. But by 1986 everyone was sick of Kingman, and Kingman was sick of everyone, and it was all best left alone. OK, so what does any of this have to do with John Walsh's study (no, I haven't forgotten about that)? Well, as soon as I saw what he was doing -- studying how batters do when the batter in front of them is intentionally walked -- I thought of Kingman. To me Dave Kingman had everything a baseball player needs to be great, everything except a reason. And in those all-to-rare moments when he had a reason -- when he was facing an old team that wronged him, when everyone seemed to have given up on him, when he played at Fenway Park with that beautiful Green Monster out there* -- he was great. *I've written this before, but Kingman started only 18 games at Fenway Park in his career. He hit 13 home runs. So, Walsh found that 64 times in his career, a pitcher/manager intentionally walked someone in front of Dave Kingman. How did Kingman do in those angry moments, when once again he was given a reason to be great? I think the numbers tell a whole story. In those 64 plate appearances Kingman hit .407 with 11 home runs. |
Edgy DC May 27 2010 11:14 AM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
That's a pretty good summary of my feelings about Kingman. I adore the guy and could talk about him all day. He was like an existentialist and misanthropic Steve Austin. Or like Wolverine without a Professor X to constantly do the personal work to keep him on the side of the commonweal.
|
dinosaur jesus May 27 2010 12:12 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
Kingman in 1979 had a very similar season to Andre Dawson's in 1987 when he got traded to the Cubs. Significantly better, actually. But Dawson won the MVP, and Kingman finished eleventh in the voting. Basically because Dawson was a good guy and Kingman was Kingman. I'm not going to cry for Dave Kingman, but that does seem kind of a raw deal. Not that either one of them deserved the award, of course.
|
Edgy DC May 27 2010 12:16 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
I cried.
|
Edgy DC May 27 2010 12:22 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
In trying to identify Dave Kingman photos, remember: if he's in Pumas, it's his first tour of duty; if he's in Ponys, it's his second.
|
batmagadanleadoff May 27 2010 02:13 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
When Kingman first signed with the Cubs, he had asked for --and received-- a lucrative incentive bonus should he break the Cubs all-time single season record for RBI's. Kingman was elated and privately thought that he had snookered the Cubs. Moreover, Kingman couldn't understand why the Cubs were so eager and willing to include the perk in Kong's contract. Kingman thought that the Cubs simply folded on that clause. He had absolutely no idea that the Cubs RBI record was also the MLB all-time record --- 190 RBI's (Hack Wilson, 1930).
|
Edgy DC May 27 2010 03:02 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
That's a great story, but it sounds a bit dubious. I know contracts now don't allow anything that smacks of a player's salary to pinned to performance numbers --- awards, yes, and appearance figues, yes, but not wins, homers, and whatnot.
|
batmagadanleadoff May 27 2010 03:09 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="Edgy DC":6zy2lr1n]That's a great story, but it sounds a bit dubious. I know contracts now don't allow anything that smacks of a player's salary to pinned to performance numbers --- awards, yes, and appearance figues, yes, but not wins, homers, and whatnot.[/quote:6zy2lr1n]
|
batmagadanleadoff May 28 2010 05:04 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="batmagadanleadoff"][quote="Edgy DC"][quote="batmagadanleadoff"]When Kingman first signed with the Cubs, he had asked for --and received-- a lucrative incentive bonus should he break the Cubs all-time single season record for RBI's. Kingman was elated and privately thought that he had snookered the Cubs. Moreover, Kingman couldn't understand why the Cubs were so eager and willing to include the perk in Kong's contract. Kingman thought that the Cubs simply folded on that clause. He had absolutely no idea that the Cubs RBI record was also the MLB all-time record --- 190 RBI's (Hack Wilson, 1930). |
Q: In all the publicity this season surrounding Roger Clemens winning his 300th game and Barry Bonds' comments about erasing Babe Ruth's name from the record books, an interesting thought occurred to me. I wondered if either player would own a team record for victories (in Roger's case) or home runs (in Barry's case) at the conclusion of his career. I discovered that even if Barry breaks Hank Aaron's record, he would not hold the Giants' team record (unless he breaks it by almost 100), and he left the 'Burgh well short of Willie Stargell's career home run record with the Bucs. Roger fares a little better in that he shares the Red Sox team record at 192, but he isn't close to either the Blue Jays or Yankee marks. I think we've entered an era, because of frequent player movement, where the career team records are actually harder to break than the overall records. My question is, have you ever heard of a team using a career team record as an incentive? For example, if you become the career leader in homers for our team, then we'll pay you a bonus of X amount of dollars. I seem to remember a story about Dave Kingman's agent demanding that the Cubs include a bonus to be paid in the event his client broke the Cubs' season record in RBIs. Of course, the Cubs were more than willing to put that in the contract because there was virtually no chance that Kingman would come close to their team record (Hack Wilson's 191). To your knowledge has it ever been done for a career mark? Drew Wilson of Forest Hills MEYER: I don't remember anything about that Kingman-Cubs contract, Drew, although it could have happened. Back then, contracts seemed more creative. And also back then perhaps players did care a bit more about holding some kind of team career record. Or at least the teams thought players did. I doubt seriously if clauses such as that are included in contracts now or even used as incentives for players to sign with teams. No question, it's probably harder to set a career team record now because players don't stay with one team forever as they used to - and as they used to have to before free agency. A player now certainly can set a team season record in some category - and for more than one team. But I think almost all of the current team career records will be in the books for a long time to come. |
batmagadanleadoff May 28 2010 05:08 PM Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM |
[quote="batmagadanleadoff"][quote="batmagadanleadoff"][quote="Edgy DC"][quote="batmagadanleadoff"]When Kingman first signed with the Cubs, he had asked for --and received-- a lucrative incentive bonus should he break the Cubs all-time single season record for RBI's. Kingman was elated and privately thought that he had snookered the Cubs. Moreover, Kingman couldn't understand why the Cubs were so eager and willing to include the perk in Kong's contract. Kingman thought that the Cubs simply folded on that clause. He had absolutely no idea that the Cubs RBI record was also the MLB all-time record --- 190 RBI's (Hack Wilson, 1930). |
Q: In all the publicity this season surrounding Roger Clemens winning his 300th game and Barry Bonds' comments about erasing Babe Ruth's name from the record books, an interesting thought occurred to me. I wondered if either player would own a team record for victories (in Roger's case) or home runs (in Barry's case) at the conclusion of his career. I discovered that even if Barry breaks Hank Aaron's record, he would not hold the Giants' team record (unless he breaks it by almost 100), and he left the 'Burgh well short of Willie Stargell's career home run record with the Bucs. Roger fares a little better in that he shares the Red Sox team record at 192, but he isn't close to either the Blue Jays or Yankee marks. I think we've entered an era, because of frequent player movement, where the career team records are actually harder to break than the overall records. My question is, have you ever heard of a team using a career team record as an incentive? For example, if you become the career leader in homers for our team, then we'll pay you a bonus of X amount of dollars. I seem to remember a story about Dave Kingman's agent demanding that the Cubs include a bonus to be paid in the event his client broke the Cubs' season record in RBIs. Of course, the Cubs were more than willing to put that in the contract because there was virtually no chance that Kingman would come close to their team record (Hack Wilson's 191). To your knowledge has it ever been done for a career mark? Drew Wilson of Forest Hills MEYER: I don't remember anything about that Kingman-Cubs contract, Drew, although it could have happened. Back then, contracts seemed more creative. And also back then perhaps players did care a bit more about holding some kind of team career record. Or at least the teams thought players did. I doubt seriously if clauses such as that are included in contracts now or even used as incentives for players to sign with teams. No question, it's probably harder to set a career team record now because players don't stay with one team forever as they used to - and as they used to have to before free agency. A player now certainly can set a team season record in some category - and for more than one team. But I think almost all of the current team career records will be in the books for a long time to come. |
A story goes that when Dave Kingman was negotiating his first Cubs contract with Bob Kennedy, he experienced a flash of inspiration, and asked Kennedy whether a clause could be written into the contract awarding him a large bonus if he broke the team record for RBI in a season. Kennedy readily agreed, and wrote the desired language and amounts into the text by hand. After signing and shaking hands, Kingman thought to ask: "By the way, what IS the the team record for RBI in a season?" Kennedy replied, deadpan: "One hundred and ninety." |