Master Index of Archived Threads


The Pole

Edgy MD Jun 19 2014 07:15 AM

Next 13 games: [list][*]Four @ Miami (who have been embarrassing the Mets the last season and a half)[/*:m] [*]Two vs. Oakland (AL’s best record)[/*:m] [*]Four @ Pittsburgh (suddenly playing like last year's Buccos)[/*:m] [*]Three @ Atlanta (longtime division leaders, recently fallen to second)[/*:m][/list:u] Nothing about the standings suggests the team is beyond making a run, but you look at the bottom of those same standings and realize the Mets are a lot closer. This stretch takes them up to Independence Day, and ends with a battle against a first-place club, and the chance to climb or fall definitively that such match-ups represent. By the birthdate of the Republic, we should have a pretty good idea whether the team is going to change their posture, and focus on next Independence Day, and all the July 4's to follow. Oh, and Gee might be activated by that Braves series.

Ceetar Jun 19 2014 07:29 AM Re: The Pole

Poles, Poles. They got some good Vodka no? I'd like to look at those next 10 first. Start making up some ground on the .500. This is working under my personal assumption that the Braves are the favorites to win the division and the Nationals aren't going to stay in front. (and the Marlins are pretenders, which is a safe bet) 4.5 behind the Braves. If you can out play them by one game in the next ten, you have 7/10 against them with only 3.5 behind. Go 5-2 and you're right there. Of course, if the Nationals are going to be the team, we don't play them until August. Then we play them a lot. 13 times the rest of the way. If the Mets were going to solve their woes and add a piece or something and be a good team in the second half, the ducks are certainly there for the knocking. Let's just beat the damn Marlins. Can we do that? Didn't Stanton just hurt himself?

Edgy MD Jun 19 2014 07:32 AM Re: The Pole

It's one game at a time, to be sure. It's just that, if a definitive statement one way or the other has been made by the fourth, management perhaps will have to use that date as a decision point. There is, of course, a good chance that those 13 games will demonstrate very little.

Ceetar Jun 19 2014 07:41 AM Re: The Pole

decisions decisions. The 4th is perhaps early, but certainly a losing record over the next 13 could be fairly crippling. I don't know what opportunities will be presenting themselves in July, or early July. Some? good ones? hmm.. What's the minimum we need to see to believe the Mets are on the cusp of getting back into it do you think? 8-5? That only gets them to 40-45. Still 5 games under, but spitting distance perhaps? 9-4? 41-44. That seems better.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 19 2014 08:55 AM Re: The Pole

Edgy MD wrote: It's one game at a time, to be sure. It's just that, if a definitive statement one way or the other has been made by the fourth, management perhaps will have to use that date as a decision point. There is, of course, a good chance that those 13 games will demonstrate very little. Yeah I'm with the second point, at least, seems likeliest.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 19 2014 09:00 AM Re: The Pole

Ceetar wrote: What's the minimum we need to see to believe the Mets are on the cusp of getting back into it do you think? I don't know. Is it mathematically possible to win the division without winning half your games?

Ceetar Jun 19 2014 09:09 AM Re: The Pole

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: What's the minimum we need to see to believe the Mets are on the cusp of getting back into it do you think? I don't know. Is it mathematically possible to win the division without winning half your games? yes. they control their own destiny. Is this your way of saying they need to go 11-2?

Frayed Knot Jun 19 2014 09:10 AM Re: The Pole

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: What's the minimum we need to see to believe the Mets are on the cusp of getting back into it do you think? I don't know. Is it mathematically possible to win the division without winning half your games? It is now under the current scheduling system.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 19 2014 09:12 AM Re: The Pole

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: What's the minimum we need to see to believe the Mets are on the cusp of getting back into it do you think? I don't know. Is it mathematically possible to win the division without winning half your games? yes. they control their own destiny. Is this your way of saying they need to go 11-2? Nope. Maybe they could win the division going 80-82. I'm wondering. Not that 80-82 wouldn't be a tall order for this squad. But a soccerball team could advance to the knockout round by going 1-2 in group play.

metsmarathon Jun 19 2014 09:38 AM Re: The Pole

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: What's the minimum we need to see to believe the Mets are on the cusp of getting back into it do you think? I don't know. Is it mathematically possible to win the division without winning half your games? of course. in fact, it's mathematically possible for a team to be significantly below 0.500 and win a division. though fairly unlikely. the easiest way to think about it is, if all the teams in the division play 0.500 ball against each other. and lose all their games outside hte division, except for one team which manages to accidentally win one of those out-of-division games. each team has 76 games in their own division, meaning you could win your division with as little as 39 wins, given my terribly unlikely scenario. that should be the theoretical minimum, unless i'm gloriously miscounting something...

Edgy MD Jun 19 2014 09:53 AM Re: The Pole

Man, too bad the 1962 Mets missed out on three-division play.

Frayed Knot Jun 19 2014 10:03 AM Re: The Pole

It was, of course, impossible to do under the no-division system used from the dawn of time through 1968. It was still very hard to do under the 2x6 set-up when all teams played 90 of their 162 within their own division. Currently, with teams playing less than half their games intra-division, it gets easier. The NFL has proved that it's possible to win a division at .500 (numerous times) and sub-.500 (at least once that I know of) - and the odds of doing so got better when they went from the six by five-team divisions to the eight by four-team set-up, something I hope MLB paid attention to.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 19 2014 10:25 AM Re: The Pole

Frayed Knot wrote: The NFL has proved that it's possible to win a division at .500 (numerous times) and sub-.500 (at least once that I know of) - and the odds of doing so got better when they went from the six by five-team divisions to the eight by four-team set-up, something I hope MLB paid attention to. I think MLB expansion to 32 teams is inevitable. It makes sense logistically -- having an even number of teams in each league and a total number of teams divisible by four, heck eight! -- as an added bonus -- and it makes sense economically -- for the buy in fees existing owners'll get to divvy up. When that happens, I'd want two eight team divisions in each league -- but I ain't holding out much hope. No one wants to be an eighth place team -- even though a fourth place team in a four team division could just as easily finish 25 games out of 1st. Anyway, I'm pretty close to the point of apathy, worn down over time into accepting that what I want doesn't matter a whit. They'll do what they'll do.

Frayed Knot Jun 19 2014 10:45 AM Re: The Pole

Not sure what the time frame is on "inevitable". Expansion generally takes years and I don't think there's been a peep about it for many years, to the point where there's been more talk in the years since the last expansion (now 17 years in the rearview) about contraction than about adding. Plus to do so simply for easy division reasons is a bad idea and a system of 8x4 would essentially kill pennant races. I believe it was the 2012 NFL season where 5 of their 8 divisions were clinched with 1/4 of the season still to go. In a sport where 1/4 season means 40 games rather than 4 and where tickets are NOT necessarily pre-sold, such a scenario would be a disaster. That's why I said that I hope MLB is paying attention when the NFL system produces seasons with a dearth of division races and sub-.500 division winners.

Ceetar Jun 19 2014 11:05 AM Re: The Pole

I don't think I like any of the divisions 32 teams presents.

metsmarathon Jun 19 2014 11:15 AM Re: The Pole

damned near just as soon as they invented the possibility of a team with a losing record winning a division, our own mets just about pulled off hte feat, winning 82 against 79 losses in 72. not to be outdone, the 2005 padres won 82 games and bested our loss total with an even 80. that same year, the washington nationals managed to finish last in the NL east with a 0.500 record. it stands to reason, too, that if you can win a division with a losing record, you could also finish last in a division with a winning record. that record would be an astonishing 123-39, presuming all the teams in your division play 0.500 ball, and defeat all comers outside the division, except for your lowly mets, who would, of course, manage to lose one game to the dodgers.

Frayed Knot Jun 19 2014 12:06 PM Re: The Pole

In what should have been the very first year of the Wild Card era in baseball, the one knocked out by the 1994 strike, the AL West was being led at the time of the season's interruption by the Texas Rangers and their 52-62 record. On the NL side the West leaders were the barely .500 Dodgers (58-56 and they won their final two games just to get to that point). Having that happen in the first year of the WC era would have been a big black eye for baseball (not that the strike wasn't, but ...). And I don't think it's any coincidence that the odd-ball four-team division, the AL West, was the one where it looked like that was going to happen.

Benjamin Grimm Jun 19 2014 12:11 PM Re: The Pole

I'd love to see a team with a .475 winning percentage win the World Series some day. I do get a perverse kick out of things that embarrass MLB.

Ceetar Jun 19 2014 12:12 PM Re: The Pole

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'd love to see a team with a .475 winning percentage win the World Series some day. I do get a perverse kick out of things that embarrass MLB. These things tend to only seem embarrassing to the people that proclaim them embarrassing. It's one of those ripe for "talk radio screaming" type topics.

seawolf17 Jun 19 2014 12:21 PM Re: The Pole

Ceetar wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'd love to see a team with a .475 winning percentage win the World Series some day. I do get a perverse kick out of things that embarrass MLB. These things tend to only seem embarrassing to the people that proclaim them embarrassing. It's one of those ripe for "talk radio screaming" type topics. [francesa] You're telling me that the MARLINS, a team that CAN'T EVEN WIN ITS OWN DIVISION, gets to win the World Series? TWICE?! YOU'VE GOTTA BE KIDDING ME, BUD SELIG... (exceptionally long pause)... THE MARLINS!... (another exceptionally long pause)... you're going to TELL ME, that the MARLINS, who can't even FILL THEIR OWN STADIUM, are going to win one of these WILD CARDS, AND THEN WIN THE WORLD SERIES!... (long pause)... back after this. [/francesa]

Nymr83 Jun 19 2014 12:58 PM Re: The Pole

Plus to do so simply for easy division reasons is a bad idea and a system of 8x4 would essentially kill pennant races I would hope they would instead destroy both Central Divisions and go 4x8 instead WAS SF TOR OAK ATL LAD NYY LAA MIA COL BAL SEA PHI SD BOS TEX NYM ARZ TB HOU CHC CIN DET CLE STL MIL CHW MIN MONTREAL PIT KC MEXICO CITY

Ceetar Jun 19 2014 01:04 PM Re: The Pole

bah, introduce the DH everywhere and make the 4 divisions way more regional than that.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 19 2014 01:10 PM Re: The Pole

Nymr83 wrote: Plus to do so simply for easy division reasons is a bad idea and a system of 8x4 would essentially kill pennant races I would hope they would instead destroy both Central Divisions and go 4x8 instead WAS SF TOR OAK ATL LAD NYY LAA MIA COL BAL SEA PHI SD BOS TEX NYM ARZ TB HOU CHC CIN DET CLE STL MIL CHW MIN MONTREAL PIT KC MEXICO CITY 4 x 8 is the way to go. Wanna know where I'd put a new team instead of Mexico City? Right here. Brooklyn. Or Jersey. This market can support another MLB team. It did for 50 years up until 1957.

Edgy MD Jun 19 2014 01:23 PM Re: The Pole

The greater New York market can support six teams, but that's not how the league operates.

Vic Sage Jun 19 2014 02:14 PM Re: The Pole Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jun 26 2014 11:41 AM

4 x 8 - or - 8 x 4 NL East Conference North: Montreal (new) NYM Phi Pitt --- South: Cinn Wash Atl Miami NL West Conference Central: Milw ChiC St.L Hou (moved from AL) --- Far West: Col SD LA SF AL East Conference North: Tor Det Bos NYY --- South: Cleve Balt TB Carolina / PR (New) AL West Conference Central: Minny ChiW KC TX --- Far West: AZ (move from NL) LAA Oak Sea These are based on time zones, which is the most important factor, for broadcast purposes. I would also suggest Houston switch back to the NL (so each league has a Texas franchise) and AZ go to the AL, so each league has a "mountain time" franchise. You could also split each conference into regional divisions (with the Ohio teams in the South of each conference), if 4-division leagues (with no wild cards) are preferred over 2-conference leagues (with wild cards).

Nymr83 Jun 19 2014 04:09 PM Re: The Pole

I put the Yankees in a tougher division than you did, so I win. :)

Edgy MD Jun 19 2014 06:47 PM Re: The Pole

This thread is totally jacked. Speaking of jacks, where the f is f-man? You think he'd be all over a thread with this title.

metsmarathon Jun 19 2014 08:13 PM Re: The Pole

he's got his fingers wrapped right around it, i'm sure. (see, this right here is why my kids can't read this forum)

batmagadanleadoff Jun 19 2014 09:31 PM Re: The Pole Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jun 20 2014 12:25 AM

Bicentennial Porn Stars of Baseball: [fimg=344:2mnolia2]https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/421836_530197660353983_457658111_n.jpg[/fimg:2mnolia2] [fimg=344:2mnolia2]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-RbYNgEzJffE/T5AE7f-X2sI/AAAAAAAACRI/J7YYF8yw1bM/s1600/1976_101.jpg[/fimg:2mnolia2]

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 19 2014 09:41 PM Re: The Pole

Edgy MD Jun 20 2014 06:16 AM Re: The Pole

Frayed Knot Jun 20 2014 06:22 AM Re: The Pole

Edgy MD Jun 20 2014 01:40 PM Re: The Pole

Looking at the 13 this way: Strap in and Double Down: 13-0 12-1 11-2 10-3 9-4 8-5 Ambiguous Outcome Calling for the Wisest of leadership 7-6 6-7 Bail Out, Dump Contracts, Turn Lineup Over, Possibly Swap Managers: 5-8 4-9 3-10 2-11 1-12 0-13 That's just speculation of course. I suppose the Mets would probably keep grinding it out for a few weeks even if there was a weak but not disastrous four-win showing or so, but I suspect he machinery would be shifting toward change behind the scenes. Anyhow, if 8-5 was what the team needed to re-launch the season, that number is now 7-5. Thanks, Wheeler.

Edgy MD Jun 22 2014 10:27 PM Re: The Pole

If you accept that 8-5 was the minimum acceptable outcome, well, 5-4 over the next nine will get them there.

Ceetar Jun 23 2014 07:04 AM Re: The Pole

Edgy MD wrote: If you accept that 8-5 was the minimum acceptable outcome, well, 5-4 over the next nine will get them there. I'd really like 6-3, but I'll accept the 5-4 as long as at least two of the five are against the Braves.

Edgy MD Jun 26 2014 03:46 AM Re: The Pole

Taking four of the next seven gets them to the Independence Day Pole at 8-5. Can Lagares help make this happen?

themetfairy Jun 26 2014 06:54 AM Re: The Pole

Obi Juan Lagares is our only hope.

Edgy MD Jun 30 2014 04:46 PM Re: The Pole

Gotta sweep to hit the pole strongly.

Ceetar Jun 30 2014 04:59 PM Re: The Pole

Edgy MD wrote: Gotta sweep to hit the pole strongly. and the pole is a tomahawk.