Forum Home

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.

(Not to be confused with the "We'll Pitch Dickey Because We Can't Afford to be Picky" thread)

When the Mets Mets arrived in Philly for a three-game set last month. they were atop the NL East, a half a game ahead of the Phillies and riding a seven game winning streak. They demolished the Phils in the opener, homering four times (Barajas twice, Wright and Francoeur) to extend their division lead. It was the high point of the Mets season. The Phils responded by demolishing the top of the Mets pitching rotation in the next two games. After that, the other 3/5 of the Mets rotation self-demolished.



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.

"No pitch above 85 MPH or your money back."

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?

New York Magazine 4/30/10 issue:

By: Will Leitch
Oh, for those halcyon days of January 2007, when Jimmy Rollins could claim that the Phillies were the team to beat in the NL East "on paper," drawing titters and derision up until the point that the Phillies won the NL East, on paper and in real life. During spring training 2008, the Mets' Carlos Beltran shot back with a "to Jimmy Rollins: We are the team to beat." But by last season, no one was bothering anymore. Maybe this weekend can bring it back?

Obviously, it is still only April — though May by the end of the series! – and we remind you, again, that the Mets were in first place on May 29 last season. (We're going to require them to make it to July, we think, to start getting serious about this.) But still: The Phillies and Mets have a three-game series with only a half-game separating the two teams at the top of the standings. Sure, the Nationals might be looming just one game back, with Florida just two, and we won't remember this series at all in two weeks, but whatever! This is as "competitive" as the rivalry has been in a couple of years now.

So, then, on to the pitching matchups! Tonight, you can expect some offense: It's Jon Niese versus Kyle Kendrick, essentially the fourth starters for each team. Tomorrow's the real party, with suddenly brilliant Mike Pelfrey facing perpetually brilliant Roy Halladay. The Mets have the definite edge on Sunday night's game, with Johan Santana against elderly, atrophying Jamie Moyer.

Whether the Mets win the series or get swept, this weekend won't matter much in the grand scheme of things. But that it matters at all is a happy step, and a massive upgrade over what everyone thought it might be a couple of weeks ago.


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.

"No pitch above 85 MPH or your money back."[/quote:1cxm391x]

I'm setting the over/ under for the number of pitches thrown by Dickey and Moyer combined that are faster than 85 MPH at 1 1/2.
What would you to bet?

Later

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.

First Senor Frisbee, now Old Man of the Italian Market. It's like the schedule-fates are specifically trying to preserve Dickey's ligament-free feelings.

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.



(Even though Dickey's gonna throw his "thing" and they know it's coming and Dickey knows that they know that Dickey's thing is gonna come but still -- no sign stealing).

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






Mike Schmidt is named 1986 NL MVP. Gary Carter openly admits to feeling slighted. Carter, who might not have been the third best player on his own team in 1986, says that he deserved the award.

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.
The results of the coin toss aren't available yet.

Later

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:


It's Either A Clout Or An Out


Mike Schmidt of the Phillies dug his sneakered feet deep into the thick shag carpet, cocked an imaginary bat alongside his curly, reddish hair, stepped into an imaginary pitch and unloosed his home run swing. There was no crack, no sock, not even a cheer from Schmidt's wife Donna as the imaginary ball sailed across his comfortable den, through the glass door, past the terrace, over the swimming pool and into the vast green valley below. "When I was a kid I always tried to crush the ball," said Schmidt, who is 26, as he followed the flight of his make-believe homer. "I guess I'm still trying."

And succeeding.

And failing.

It is the personal purgatory of a home run hitter that success very often is a hit or miss proposition. The same hard, full cut that can send the ball into the distant bleachers can also send the hitter back to the dugout with his bat in his hands. It is his doing and his undoing.

This season, baseball's premier power whiffers, Schmidt and 6'6", 210-pound Dave (Kong) Kingman of the Mets, have been striking home runs and striking out at prodigious rates. While no one else in the National League has more than six homers and 11 strikeouts, Third Baseman Schmidt and Rightfielder Kingman already have nine and seven of the former and 15 and 21 of the latter. The strikeouts flow steadily; the home runs usually come in headline-making bunches. Kingman clouted six in a five-game stretch to take an early lead in the major league home run race, a contest he narrowly lost to Schmidt last season. But Schmidt overtook Kingman in a hurry. During a tear that extended into last week, he smacked seven in four games, including four straight during one windy afternoon in Chicago. In the history of baseball only three other players had accomplished that. The last National Leaguer to do it was the Boston Braves' Bob Lowe in 1894.

Characteristically, neither Kingman nor Schmidt had been hitting well before their hot streaks began. In 15 previous at bats, Kingman, who is 27 and has a .226 lifetime average, had hit one homer and two singles and had struck out six times. Schmidt, a .248 career batter, was 3 for 18 with one home run and nine strikeouts. Then, in successive visits to Wrigley Field and Pittsburgh's Three Rivers Stadium, they started connecting—high, long and often.

"When you get in a groove like that the ball looks twice its normal size," says Kingman. "Other times it comes up to the plate looking like a golf ball. It doesn't matter how you feel, either. You can feel great and not hit a thing, then feel lousy and hit it out." Schmidt says the ball looked bigger to him, too, and that he was making perfect contact because he was in one of those elusive stretches when his swing is perfect. For both, when they hit the ball it stayed hit. During their streaks they struck out 12 times and had only two hits besides the home runs—a Schmidt single and a Kingman double.

The two sluggers erupt that way every so often, perhaps to prove they are still alive and playing. Kingman had 13 homers last July, Schmidt countered with 12 in August. To opponents, their streaks seem even more torrid than they are, because Schmidt and Kingman are not in the business of hitting cheap home runs. There are few players, if any, who can match them for distance. Kingman smashed a drive of more than 600 feet off the Yankees' Catfish Hunter in spring training last year that both New York teams still talk about. "I could have chopped that up into 35 singles," says Mets First Baseman Ed Kranepool.

Two weeks ago Kingman blasted a shot that Chicagoans believe was the longest ever hit at Wrigley Field. Estimated to have gone 650 feet on the fly, it carried over the left-field bleachers, across Waveland Avenue and down a side street. After landing, the ball bounced a couple of times before crashing into the side of a house. While Kingman was still circling the bases, the residents of the house poured out on the front porch to see who was knocking at their wall. Schmidt has not belted one that far in 1976, but he is well remembered in Houston where a couple of seasons back he stroked a ball off the Astrodome speaker, which is 117 feet above the field.

"Dave's style is to swing hard in case he hits it," says Kranepool. "When he's connecting, the only way to defense him is to sit in the upper deck. I've never seen anybody hit the ball farther."

The Phillies feel the same way about Schmidt. "Mike wants to hit it all the way out of the stadium, not just 330 feet over the outfield fence," says Shortstop Larry Bowa. "With his swing, he can hit 20 accidentally."

Schmidt and Kingman have always been power hitters with a tendency to short-circuit. Entering this season (Kingman's sixth and Schmidt's fifth), both had struck out once every three at bats and homered every 15 or 16. This means they are more likely to hit a home run than Willie Stargell, Dick Allen, Reggie Jackson or Frank Robinson—but also are more likely to strike out. In fact, Kingman has a higher homer frequency than Henry Aaron, and Schmidt a higher whiff rate than Mickey Mantle, who holds the career record for strikeouts.

Although both are overanxious over-swingers, the 6'2", 195-pound Schmidt at least has a thorough knowledge of the strike zone. He drew 101 bases on balls last year while leading the National League in homers (38) and strikeouts (180) for the second straight season. His .249 batting average was the lowest by a National League home run champion in 23 years and approximately 20 points below the 1975 average for all the nonpitchers in the league. Kingman was even more inconsistent. Although he smacked a team-record 36 homers and led the league with 20 game-winning RBIs, he batted only .231 and had 153 strikeouts and just 34 walks. "Schmidt is much more controlled," says St. Louis Reliever Al Hrabosky. "You can set Kingman up to swing at bad pitches, but you have to throw strikes to Schmidt."

Kingman's problem is compounded by his awkward appearance at the plate—he resembles a very tall man falling from a very short tree. He leans, he reaches, he stumbles. Even though his output is only slightly better, Schmidt presents a more classic figure, and he knows it. "Kingman wants to hit it out on every swing," Schmidt says disparagingly. "He's not gonna hit for average—ever."

To give him his due, Schmidt can be equally hard on himself. Lounging in his new house in West Berlin, N.J. last week, he said, "I don't like to give pitchers much credit. I figure that 99% of the times I fail it's because of lousy hitting, not good pitching. I know that I shouldn't take a long stride and a big swing. I know I should just try to meet the ball. I know I hit most of my home runs last year with two strikes on me, when I was protecting the plate because I was scared I would strike out again. But knowing these things doesn't always help. Sometimes when the pitcher lets the ball go, your mind goes blank. You just see the ball and you react the way you've trained yourself. The adrenaline starts flowing and you try to hit it a country mile to left field. It's really stupid, but that's the way it is."

Schmidt, who had been simulating good and bad swings as he talked, excused himself to get a bat. "Here, I'll show you what I mean," he said, stepping out onto the terrace.

He took his stance, visualized a low fastball out over the plate and took an all-out rip at it. "There, that's as hard as I can swing," he said. "But 90 times out of 100 I won't even make contact with a swing like that. I maybe have one chance in 100 to hit it out. So why do I do it? If I were my manager, I'd fine myself $100 every time I pop up and give myself $100 every time I get a ground-ball hit."

Indeed, Philadelphia Manager Danny Ozark has reacted to Schmidt's hot-and-cold performances by dropping him from third to sixth in the batting order. "He'll stay there until he cuts down on his strikeouts," Ozark says. Schmidt agrees that "180 strikeouts is a ridiculous number. No one with good hand-eye coordination like mine should strike out that much. This is what makes them so hard to take. I do so many things well that I can't understand why hitting a baseball is so difficult. I've got to find what it takes to make me do what I know I have to do."

In some ways Kingman is more realistic than Schmidt. He is much less analytical—and much more private—but he admits, "I don't think I'll ever hit for average. I'm not unable to do it. I'm just not that type of hitter. I could choke up, punch the ball and almost totally eliminate strikeouts, but I wouldn't hit any home runs. And that's what I'm paid to do, to hit homers and drive in runs." Despite this sober assessment, Kingman insists that his strikeouts will decrease. "I am confident there will be noticeably fewer this year," he says. "I'm really concentrating on that. I'll always have the same swing, but I have the experience and the maturity now that I did not have before."

So far Kingman is striking out as much as he ever has—as is Schmidt—and he merely seems to be reiterating what he has said for years: that he definitely will improve his home run-strikeout ratio. It was Kingman's failure to back those claims with deeds that prompted the Giants, for whom he played his first four seasons, to ship him to the Mets last year for the bargain price of $125,000. New York General Manager Joe McDonald would like to believe he found a Steuben vase at a rummage sale. Says McDonald, perhaps wishfully, "Defensively, Kingman has taken a bad rap. He isn't a deficit at all." And when Kingman, a fast runner who has stolen four bases in five attempts this season, bunted for a hit during a game in St. Louis last week, McDonald saw it was proof that he was becoming "the complete player Dave has told me he would be."

Kingman could start by altering his please-help-me-I'm-falling batting style. Convincing him to do this is no easy task, because he is acutely sensitive to criticism. "We take great pains to keep Dave from getting down on himself," McDonald says. "Phil Cavarretta has been a good batting instructor for him because he's very low key and doesn't try to force him into things."

The ideal instructor for Kingman, psychologically at least, would probably be someone like Lou Brock of St. Louis, who manages to hit for average despite a strikeout problem. Brock says, "You shouldn't alter your swing to avoid striking out. An out is an out, no matter how it's made. If you have to make one, do it with your best stroke. You can't give in one bit."

While this might satisfy Kingman, it does not appeal to Schmidt, a better all-round player who stole 29 bases last season and finished second in the Gold Glove voting for National League third basemen. "I figure that 80 fewer strikeouts would have given me 20 more hits last year—and probably four more homers," he says. "And who knows how many times I might have advanced a runner with an out or gotten on because of an error?"

Schmidt proved his point in a game against Atlanta last week. Hitting the ball on the ground four straight times, he reached base three times on an infield hit and two errors. The same night in Houston Kingman was going 1 for 3 and striking out once.

"At a very early age you find out what kind of player you are," Kingman says. "I have always preferred seeing four home runs to watching a no-hitter. I'd rather see Willie Mays hit than Sandy Koufax pitch." The player he admires most is Willie McCovey, who played first base for the Giants when Kingman came up from the minors and is now concluding his career in San Diego. " McCovey was a home run hitter who didn't strike out," Kingman says. "What else can you ask for?"

On the other hand, Schmidt seems to be a frustrated singles hitter. On the day he hit four home runs, he used a bat that belongs to punch-hitting reserve Infielder Tony Taylor, which is an inch shorter and an ounce lighter than the one he normally wields. And Schmidt envies the peace of mind that he is sure Cub Bill Madlock, the National League's batting champion, must enjoy. "Madlock probably has no idea of the frustrations I experience," Schmidt says. "He just goes up there and gets base hits. Guys like him don't have to think. They just react." Guys like Schmidt keep plaques in their dressing stalls that ask, WHO CAN THINK AND HIT AT THE SAME TIME?

While Kingman says he would like to lead the league in homers and RBIs, Schmidt, having accomplished the one and come close to the other, has a different ambition. "Pitchers aren't afraid of me," he says. "I'm a dangerous hitter, but I'm not a good hitter. I want to intimidate the pitcher, make him squeeze the ball when he sees me standing up there. I make a lot of money and live in a nice house because I hit home runs. But deep down I want to bat .340 some year."

Ironically, he feels he has made some progress by hitting so many homers recently. "It's helping me gain more confidence. I hope I can put it to use and get more hits. If I had settled for a few more singles up the middle last year we probably would have won the pennant. And by doing that I probably would have hit a few more homers. It's a freaky thing, but then baseball is a freaky game."

For power whiffers like Kingman and Schmidt it is the freakiest.


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.



lol.
worth the wait.

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.
brings back memories.
Thnx 4 sharing

180 & 153 ks each in '75.
I thought that # would be higher, esp for Kong.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
May 25 2010 11:00 AM
Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM

A REMINDER:

"Somebody maybe ought to check the Mets if they (steal signs). Their (----ing) home record is out of this world (14-8), and they're losing on the road (4-8). Sometimes that's a good indicator of getting signs and (crap). I'm not accusing them, but you look at that and - damn. We're about the same home and road. I'm just saying their record is much better at home and they hit better."



(Are they still begging for fastballs in Victorino's back and some early-morning hotel wake-up calls for everyone? Would that there were some vehicle through which we could know the enemy better.)

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.
Phillies eliminate Mets in 1989.
Hernandez's last Met AB at Shea.
Davey's job is endangered.
McDowell and Jefferies tangle.
The Mets made more news off the field yesterday than on it.

Davey Johnson had separate meetings earlier in the day with both Frank Cashen and Joe McIlvaine to discuss the Mets' downfall this season. The Mets' manager said he admitted he may have been too lenient on his players this season. Whether that admission will lead to his dismissal as manager remains to be seen. Johnson has two seasons remaining on his contract, with the club having the option to renew it for a third season.

''It was an amicable meeting but I guess they give you a big meal before they pull the trigger,'' Johnson said. ''Every manager feels a bit uneasy about his future. If it's time for a change, it's time for a change. It's not going to make me bitter toward anyone in life or in the organization. It's not going to take away from my nine years here. 'Liberties Taken'

''My handling of players in the past has always been, 'You're a professional, you know what you have to do to get ready.' I don't want to interfere with that. I want guys to be relaxed. But it was apparent to me that liberties were taken that conceivably could have affected performance this year. I think the majority of players would welcome a little more regimented atmosphere.''

Darryl Strawberry, in the meantime, said he will not sign a contract extension with the Mets during the off season, regardless of what the Mets offer. Strawberry also plans to meet with Cashen when the season ends to discuss whether the team would consider trading Strawberry, preferably to a West coast team.

The comments of Strawberry and Johnson overshadowed last night's game at Shea Stadium, which the Mets lost, 5-3, to the Phillies. An emotional moment occurred when both Keith Hernandez and Gary Carter made pinch-hit appearances. Both will be free agents after the season and may not be offered new contracts by the Mets. After Hernandez flied out in the eighth inning, he tipped his cap to the cheering crowd, a farewell gesture in what may have been his last home game as a Met. Carter delivered a pinch-hit double in the ninth inning, and he also tipped his cap, then left the game to a huge ovation. Fight Breaks Out

The game ended on a bizarre note, when Gregg Jefferies and Roger McDowell of the Phillies fought in the infield after the final out. Jefferies and McDowell, a former Met, exchanged words as Jefferies ran down the first-base line. After the final out, Jefferies and McDowell screamed at each other, then Jefferies charged McDowell. Both benches emptied to separate the two players.

''Roger screamed something at Gregg,'' Johnson said. ''It went back to Monday night, when Roger screamed something at Gregg after he broke Gregg's bat. Obviously there's bad blood between them.''

Jefferies refused to comment on the incident. McDowell claimed Jefferies started the incident by cursing at him.

''I pitched him inside a little on Monday, so I guess that's what it was all about,'' McDowell said.

Nick Leyva, Philadelphia's manager, defended McDowell by saying that Jefferies is not popular among his own teammates, then Leyva said, ''There were 30 guys on our side rooting for Roger and 20 guys on their side rooting for Roger.''

Strawberry can become a free agent after next season, the option year on his current contract. The Mets have until one week after the World Series ends to inform Strawberry whether they will pick up his option. Strawberry's contract calls for him to earn $1.8 million next season.

''I've been thinking about this and I'm not going to demand a trade, but I'm going to talk with Frank after the season's over,'' Strawberry said. Welcomes Trade ''I've got a lot of pride. I play baseball for fun, but as long as I'm here, I'll be the guy blamed for everything. I've stood up to it. I've taken it. But I think it's time for a change. I have nothing against the fans or New York. But the only thing that will probably make me happy is a change in scenery.''

Asked what he would do if Strawberry asked to be traded, Cashen said,

''It's a hypothetical question. He hasn't said anything to me, so I don't have an answer.''

Assuming the Mets pick up the option on his contract for next season and do not trade him, Strawberry said he will play 1990 with the Mets, then he will strongly consider signing with another team. This has been Strawberry's most frustrating and disappointing season with the Mets. He is batting .225, with 29 home runs and 77 r.b.i. Strawberry struggled throughout August and September when the Mets desperately needed his offense from the cleanup position. Yet Strawberry feels he has been unfairly targeted for blame in the Mets' failure to win the National League East.

''Everybody's entitled to one bad season, and this has been mine,'' Strawberry said. ''I just didn't hit. ''People say if I don't hit, the Mets don't win. It will be like that as long as I'm in New York.''

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.

love this

''It was an amicable meeting but I guess they give you a big meal before they pull the trigger,''Every manager feels a bit uneasy about his future. If it's time for a change, it's time for a change. It's not going to make me bitter toward anyone in life or in the organization. It's not going to take away from my nine years here. 'Liberties Taken'


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:
Reyes-SS
Castillo-2B
Bay-LF
Davis-1B
Wright-3B
Pagan-CF
Barajas-C
Francoeur-RF
Dickey-RHP


MFP:

Victorino CF
Polanco 3B
Utley 2B
Howard 1B
Werth RF
Ibanez LF
Ruiz C
Castro SS
Moyer P

bmfc1
May 25 2010 01:19 PM
Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM

NewYorkMets

#Mets claim infielder Justin Turner off waivers from Baltimore and option him to Buffalo (AAA).

http://www.baseball-reference.com/minor ... rner001jus

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]

Eighteen players have been Mets, Reds and O's at the major league level. Nobody distinguished himself in all three uniforms. Most noteworthy from a Met perspective: Ray Knight, Randy Myers, Jack Fisher, Luis Lopez, Pete Harnsich and, for history's sake, Hobie Landrith..

The distinguishing slides downhill from there:

Bruce Chen, Jeff Conine, Brook Fordyce, Keith Hughes, Stanley Jefferson, Bob Johnson, Chuck McElroy, Randy Milligan, Joe Nolan, Billy Short, Pete Smith, Tony Tarasco.

That's the legacy to which you must live up, Justin Turner. Good luck.

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!!!!

LETS

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


Kookie Cookie Phighting Mad

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.
Dicky looks tricky.

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.
Singles, sac'd over by Castillo, steals 3rd, scores on a Bay ground out.
HellofAplay by Castro at short stole a single from Bay too.

Mets up 1-0

Zvon
May 25 2010 05:29 PM
Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM

Aw shit.
Dicky hit by a line drive off the bat of Howard.
Hit him in the elbow.
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.
He is checked out and he will continue.
That had to hurt tho.

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.
Im a huge Utopia fan.
Saw them live many, many, many times.
Todd as well. Anytime he came around.

Werth is havin a hellofAyear.
Course, contract year.

Zvon
May 25 2010 05:37 PM
Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM

ooooh, nice.
Big bases bloated DP.
BIG!

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.

I'll take the one run.

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!
Cripes ump, he was was walking toward the dugout so he didnt think he touched it.
And it ends up a walk.
Gah.

Zvon
May 25 2010 06:08 PM
Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM

whew.
Out of another bases loaded jam.

We gotta tack on some more runs.
I gotta be able to relax.

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,
and he looked to be in some real pain.

They say they assume that is swelling up a bit.

He will continue on tho.

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.
I wouldn't even look to see if Barajas caught it.

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!
Pagan walks!

2 on, no out.

Keep it goin guys

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.

But Francoeur's fly is deep enough to score the Dabidrye.

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.
Seeing good fundamental baseball tonight.

Werth ends it with a fine catch on the Dickey low liner.

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.
1st one I don't think they had a chance.
That last one I thought they did.
Reyes throws it away but that becomes history as Howard pops out to center to end the
Phils half of the 5th.

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!!

on the pre-game show they had blue "i like ike" tshirts at some store, where was that? cant find it online

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!
Wright and Davis!

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!!

on the pre-game show they had blue "i like ike" tshirts at some store, where was that? cant find it online[/quote:3i0nw75s]

Modells


http://dnainfo.com/20100525/midtown-wes ... ike-tshirt

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.

http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/2 ... ref=sports

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.

http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/2 ... ref=sports[/quote:kqf5t5ql]



“On the other side, we were always worried about the Phillies,” he said. “They’re not worried here. There’s no panic. It’s a different vibe, the whole atmosphere, from management on down.”


OK , we get it, you're upset.....I'm over it sand so should you...

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!
I was wondering if we shud be givin a pinch hitter some swings there but Valdes shuts me up with a double.


and..........


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!!

on the pre-game show they had blue "i like ike" tshirts at some store, where was that? cant find it online[/quote:zhqwssax]

Modells


http://dnainfo.com/20100525/midtown-wes ... ike-tshirt[/quote:zhqwssax]


thanks!

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.
Not the most dominate necessarily as the hits and walks per team were close to even until the very end, but we took advantage of every situation and stuffed them in all of theirs. Got runs via outs, turned DPs, solid 'D' all around, stole a few bases, used just two pitchers, etc.

FUNDIES BABY!!

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 ...



Let me blow that up.

we took advantage of every situation

Great game.
Please let us have another tomorrow, Gods of baseball.
Please..........

Rockin' Doc
May 25 2010 08:53 PM
Re: We'll Pitch Dickey. We're not picky. IGT:5/25/10 PHIL@NYM



Thank you sir, may I have another!

May the beatings continue.

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).

We still have "Takin Care of Business" but afterwards they played "Uprising" by Muse which I thought was a nice choice.

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.

Beautiful Dickey, of course.

Beautiful lack of violence instigated by no-show Phillies fans since they had as much fight in them as their alleged Fightin's.

Beautiful. Just beautiful.

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.

THEY STOMPED ANYHOW!

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.

Beautiful Dickey, of course.

Beautiful lack of violence instigated by no-show Phillies fans since they had as much fight in them as their alleged Fightin's.

Beautiful. Just beautiful.[/quote:swos8fgk]

Agreed. There was one vocal group of Phillies fans in RF under the porch getting some chants going early, all wearing the same shirt, but they faded quickly.

I'll stick to Brooklyn Sabroso or Shackmeister Ale. Not a big fan of the toasted lager. Actually, I was sitting pretty close to opposite it as well, in section 508.

Beautiful vintage and historic Reyes.

Phillies scored three times in the 9th in hopeless fashion after wakefield came out, besides that haven't scored since the 6th inning on Friday. That's once in 29 innings.

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.

I also liked that Carter came thru and that we whupped up on Nelson Figueroa's ass. The Phillies will release him at some point, maybe very soon, and I hope all his fans here realize we were the better club for doing it first.

Omar's been very sneaky with Dickey, Valdes and Takahashi.

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]

Beautiful Dickey, of course.... Beautiful. Just beautiful.[/quote:1t1hcstz]

I'm trying to conjure up some of the past Mets memorable knuckle-balling performances. I'm blank here. Ya got any? Anybody got any?

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.

His only remaining competition for most successful knuckleballer in Mets history is Pitching Coach Charlie Hough.

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)
Knuckleballers, if they are any good, pitch to the age of 40 and beyond - Wilhelm, Wilbut Wood, the Niekros and Wakefield.
Dickey is a mere kid at 35. Who knows?

Later

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?

I wonder if they actually want him to feel buried so that he'll accept an assignment to Buffalo.

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?

I wonder if they actually want him to feel buried so that he'll accept an assignment to Buffalo.[/quote:tw8a8puw]

I hope so. What has he done to deserve an inning? I'd rather see 3 innings of Vakdes, it helps give us a better idea what Valdes can do when pitching more innings if he is required for a spot-start.

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.




Maybe they're fixing him in the bullpen. working on his mechanics. adjusting his arm angle.

Or maybe Manuel's just ignoring him. Although knowing Manuel we'll see him in like 3 games in a row in big spots or something coming up.

Or maybe they intend to give him one more start in Milwaukee and sticking with teh 4-man rotation otherwise, they could get by until June 12th like this(Niese should be ready then), if they give Perez that one start.

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.

Ollie will likely get a moment this series, with the lefty-stacked lineup.

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.

I tellsya, get good performances out of these guys when they;re asked to perform and you're a managing genius.

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.

I tellsya, get good performances out of these guys when they;re asked to perform and you're a managing genius.[/quote:2au5vhoc]

shocker, that.


I called Valdes coming in in the 3rd. (though at the time it only lookedl ike Dickey would make it 5) just seems to make sense if they might consider him to start, to have him throw a bunch of innings.

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?

I wonder if they actually want him to feel buried so that he'll accept an assignment to Buffalo.[/quote:1seegbtk]

Bingo!

On a side note I attempted to score the POTG for this game,
(wherein I reward everyone who does his job properly
with something, ..anything,) ...and my head exploded.

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:



Joe Posnanski reflects on Dave Kingman. I thought I'd stick the piece in this thread, as a follow-up to Either a Clout or an Out. The article's a year and a half old so some of you may have read it.

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.

What they don't point out is that Kingman disappeared after hitting 35 homers because the owners were price-fixing that year. He won a settlement.

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.

Of course, had he won the MVP, or at least got up where he belonged in the top four or so, the Mets would have had to give up more than Steve Henderson to get him back.

You know, if the defense wasn't there, it wasn't because he was disengaged.

Unless it was:

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]

It was a bonus -- not salary. Given that Kingman signed with Chicago as a free agent, the guaranteed portion of his contract was likely sufficiently affluent relative to most other major leaguers, so that no one could have reasonably thought that he was being underpaid, or paid by the RBI. And I'm 100% positive about my recall of the story. It was Kingman himself who related it. It might've appeared in a Baseball Digest, though I can't remember the exact source. I believe that the story was made public while Kingman was a Cub, so I'm going back more than 30 years.

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).


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.

It was a bonus -- not salary. Given that Kingman signed with Chicago as a free agent, the guaranteed portion of his contract was likely sufficiently affluent relative to most other major leaguers, so that no one could have reasonably thought that he was being underpaid, or paid by the RBI. And I'm 100% positive about my recall of the story. It was Kingman himself who related it. It might've appeared in a Baseball Digest, though I can't remember the exact source. I believe that the story was made public while Kingman was a Cub, so I'm going back more than 30 years.

I still can't remember the source for my memory, but in googling the issue, I came across this 2003 Q&A from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

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.


http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03309/238458-126.stm

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).


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.

It was a bonus -- not salary. Given that Kingman signed with Chicago as a free agent, the guaranteed portion of his contract was likely sufficiently affluent relative to most other major leaguers, so that no one could have reasonably thought that he was being underpaid, or paid by the RBI. And I'm 100% positive about my recall of the story. It was Kingman himself who related it. It might've appeared in a Baseball Digest, though I can't remember the exact source. I believe that the story was made public while Kingman was a Cub, so I'm going back more than 30 years.

I still can't remember the source for my memory, but in googling the issue, I came across this 2003 Q&A from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

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.


http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03309/238458-126.stm
And then there's this from a Cub web-site:

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."


http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2007/1/28/5501/22175