Master Index of Archived Threads


Memories of Brian Bannister

Edgy DC Dec 06 2006 12:09 PM

Flirted with a no-hitter his first time out, if only nominally. If I recally correctly, his pitch count was pretty bloated throughout and he wasn't going to finish under any circumstances. Amazingly, he's the 13th Met with the initials B.B., a mongram that represents a full 1.63% of all Mets ever. Bob Bailor (1981 - 1983) Billy Baldwin (1976) Brian Bannister (2006) Billy Beane (1984, 1985) Blaine Beatty (1989, 1991) Butch Benton (1978, 1980) Bruce Berenyi (1984 - 1986) Bruce Bochy (1982) Brian Bohanon (1997, 1998) Bruce Boisclair (1974, 1976 - 1979) Bobby Bonilla (1992 - 1995, 1999) Brian Buchanan (2004) Brett Butler (1995)

DocTee Dec 06 2006 12:13 PM

I was at his start in SF where he injured himself rounding third. I remember him throwing lots of pitches, even in that truncated outing, and getting frustrated by that. Wags gave upa tying homer to Bonds in the ninth that day; that frustrated me more.

seawolf17 Dec 06 2006 12:35 PM

As I posted in his other thread, we first saw Bannister in Norwich, CT two summers ago when he was with the B-Mets. Considering he was something of a top prospect, we were excited to see him; but he couldn't find the plate, walking a bunch of guys (and IIRC, throwing a couple of WPs) in a short outing. I'll repost the pre-game bullpen photo:

Johnny Dickshot Dec 06 2006 12:59 PM

A survivor. Longshot to ever make the club, made the club, then threw a couple of white-knuckle starts where he allowed everybody on base and nobody to score. Wore No. 40 and showed a TON of sock. Audition ended when he pulled a hammy running the bases in that Giants' game -- one of the most entertaining of the year, for sure -- but sacked-up big-time and scored hopping on one leg almost the entire length of the baseline. He hit two doubles in that game, IIRC. Wags cost him a win that day that he shirley deserved (or did he not last 5?) but the Mets won in extras thanks to what would essentially be the only contributions of the whole year by Castro and Woodward. Big game.

iramets Dec 06 2006 01:09 PM

The Mets no longer think they’ll need young Brian Bannister, who’s sent to be a Royal. Less damaging than swapping Nolan Ryan? Let’s hope so, though the concept here of “loyal” Still eludes them. He showed some basepath hustle To the Giants (and guttiness all spring) But, tearing ass, he tore a hamstring muscle, And so became a disposable thing. So Omar’s lit a match to Brian Bannister, After anointing him with gasoline. The Mets have thanked him, filled an iron canister To the brim for him with Vaseline, Fucked him up the ass, and sent him packing To the Ultima Thule of cold Kay Sea, To lose his twenty games and, with some backing, Win a game or two, or maybe three. But if he could reverse, somehow, those numbers And turn this trade into an utter steal, We’d offer him (shipping out some Humbers), A five-year, hundred-million dollar deal So shed no tears for Brian as he leaves us, Seeking glory, fame and salary. And if he fails (I hope not, though it grieves us) He can run Citi’s photo gallery.

metirish Dec 06 2006 01:12 PM

Dickshot just about summed it up for me.....oh and this http://www.loft19.com/

Johnny Dickshot Dec 06 2006 01:18 PM

Best poem about male anal rape all year, without a doubt.

Rockin' Doc Dec 06 2006 10:07 PM

Brian was always a good kid growing up. He was never one to cause any trouble, you could always depend on him. He worked hard in school and even harder on the athletic field. Brian may not have been the most talented ballplayer, but he got the most out of the talent he had. He was tough and resilient, he made me proud. Good luck in KC.

ScarletKnight41 Dec 06 2006 10:16 PM

I can only think of him hobbling to home plate despite his busted hamstring. The kid has guts.

Nymr83 Dec 06 2006 10:25 PM

he was definetaly hard-working and i respected that, but in my opinion that talent (and especially the control) just wasn't there.

metirish Dec 06 2006 10:32 PM

Brian lived on the edge for sure...at times I thought maybe he would throw the Mets first no hitter...walk 10 but no hits kinda deal.

Frayed Knot Dec 06 2006 10:53 PM

His control in the minors wasn't really a problem (individual games not- withstanding) and his ML career was too brief a sample size to judge. He's the type you wanted to root for since any success would have had an air of overachieving. Not a 1st-rounder like his pop (I think Floyd was a #1 overall) nor did he have the foresight to be born left-handed, he didn't even get a full-time scholarship to play ball in college. But a smart kid who made the most of what he had. I'd like to see him do well (just not as well as Bourgas)

iramets Dec 07 2006 07:12 AM

ScarletKnight41 wrote: I can only think of him hobbling to home plate despite his busted hamstring. The kid has guts. Well, that was part of my point in saying the Mets owed him better than he got. Talk about putting your team's interests above your own. I'm sure his agent and his mom and his personal physician were screaming from the stands "Don't even think about moving another step! It's just a friggen run! It's just a friggen game! DON'T YOU DARE MOVE!"" yet the kid kept trying to score, and certainly made his injury much worse than it was when he felt the first twinges. I say that means you owe the kid something material. I say that means you try to find a way to give the kid a real shot at getting his job back. I say you hold off on trading the kid for a few years, at least until he's pitched his way out of your rotation. I say you don't treat him like a disposible commodity to get you some out-of-control longshot with a very healthy pet gopher. But do they listen to what I say? Well, excuse me for caring.

Yancy Street Gang Dec 07 2006 07:43 AM

I can't see how the Mets wronged Bannister. They traded him to Kansas City. He'll have a better chance of pitching in the big leagues with the Royals. To not trade a pitcher just because he's a gutsy baserunner doesn't make a lot of sense.

iramets Dec 07 2006 08:04 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 07 2006 08:17 AM

Is that a self-serving rationale or what? If you asked Brian Bannister if he'd rather be in KC with a good shot at the rotation or in NY with only a fighting chance at the rotation, I'm pretty sure he'd take NY. But you want to persuade yourself that it's good for him, so you assert that clearly this is a great favor the Mets are doing Bannister. It's a selfish, shitty, cold-hearted business move that sends a mean message to kids (and some grownups) about hustle and team play and all those other platitudes that don;t really matter all that much. If my kids ask me about this move, I've got nothing for them besides. "Life sucks sometimes, guys. Sorry. I wouldna done it. I want you to hustle and play hard and think of your team first anyway, okay?"

Yancy Street Gang Dec 07 2006 08:13 AM

I'm saying they didn't screw him, they traded him. I didn't say "it was clearly a great favor." If you're old enough to have kids you should be mature enough to not get so worked up over the trade of a marginal player. It happens all the time. Of course it's a business move. It's rare to find a trade that isn't.

iramets Dec 07 2006 08:32 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 07 2006 08:33 AM

Of course it's a "business move"--you can't find a single thing in baseball that cant be rationalized that way. I'm saying that this particular, rather unnecessary, shuffling of minor and marginal baseball players, or at least the timing of it, has a grim, cold-hearted message: Don't hustle, don't put your team's interests first, don't ever expect anything resembling loyalty from a baseball club unless your contract calls for it, and don't ever get so competitive that you forget for a second that your primary loyality is to your own well-being, no one else's. If you get injured and make your injury worse by continuing to compete and lose your job and the team has openings for a rotation slot, you'll get traded anyway, even to an awful underfinanced franchise, if your employer sees any marginal advantage for themselves in the trade. Years of good character? Nothing. Years of putting out 100% effort? Meaningless. If your team sees a kid with little promise, your career going to be the sacrifice they pay to get it. It just stinks on ice. Sorry you can't see it.

Yancy Street Gang Dec 07 2006 08:32 AM

I can't see it.

Frayed Knot Dec 07 2006 09:09 AM

And here in Aisle 5 we have Gross Over-reactions

Rotblatt Dec 07 2006 10:10 AM

Ira, I agree with you that we fucked him, but sentiment is for fans, not management. In my opinion, trading Banniser was a good baseball decision, and that's all I ask for from my baseball overlords. Some fans, for example, wanted to resign Piazza out of sentiment last year, but Omar (wisely, IMO) decided the team was better served by letting him walk. Bannister had guts, and I think he'll do well going forward--his high walk ratio struck me as a fluke. It was completely at odds with his minor league track record. I don't think he'll be a world beater, but I wouldn't be suprised to see him be a decent #4 pitcher as early as 2007.

Johnny Dickshot Dec 07 2006 11:16 AM

Rotblatt wrote: Ira, I agree with you that we fucked him, but sentiment is for fans, not management. How so? That we didn't offer him a lifetime contract for hurting himself?

TheOldMole Dec 07 2006 11:18 AM

You can't keep everyone, and the Mets haven't blacklisted him from baseball. What combinations of initials are more common than B.B.?

seawolf17 Dec 07 2006 11:18 AM

And I can sum it all up in just one word: courage, dedication, daring, pride, pluck, spirit, grit, mettle, and G-U-T-S, guts. Why, Brian Bannister's got more guts in his little finger than most of us have in our large intestine, including the colon!

Rotblatt Dec 07 2006 11:32 AM

]How so? That we didn't offer him a lifetime contract for hurting himself? By sending him to Kansas City. I mean, ouch! More seriously, I think ira's point is that the kid earned a chance to compete for a starting rotation job with us in 2007, and I agree with that. But front office (appropriately, IMO) put the interests of the team first, and deprived Bannister of his reward. If I were Bannister, I'd be dissapointed and probably feel like I got fucked out of a chance to pitch for a playoff-bound team.

iramets Dec 07 2006 11:34 AM

Disadvantages to trading Bannister: 1) the guy seemed to be dedicated, even to the extent of incurring an injury he could have ameliorated by placing his own interests beforethose of the team. You want guys with his special brand of dedication. 2) the guy did a decent job for you last spring. Forgetting that he might be owed anything for this performance, he pitched pretty well under difficult conditions, at a time you badly needed stability in your rotation. You want guys who can cope with pressure, and he seemed unusually capable of handling pressure. 3) You still have an unsettled rotation. You might just need a # 5 starter, and Bannister comes cheap. Advantages to trading Bannister: 1) Maybe you get a better pitcher, or at least one who is better suited for the bullpen than the rotation, where (maybe) your needs are greater. It's arguable that you're getting the better pitcher (12 blown saves! And you like this deal?) but you're almost certainly losing the better human being. Sometimes having a dedicated person on your club is a good thing for the club. Of course, behaving decently is nice, too, but no one expects human decency from any corporation. This move just seems unnecessarily and gratuitously cold-hearted, and for a very dubious advantage.

Johnny Dickshot Dec 07 2006 11:39 AM

I don't see why we couldn't interpret his injury as a result of not being in shape, or a just a case of not being a good enough athlete, to handle the rigors of his job. I mean, it's hardly any sillier than saying it's evidence of great underlying character.

iramets Dec 07 2006 11:50 AM

It's silly to go there unless you have a recurring pattern of injuries that are obviously caused by being out of shape--or are you making the argument that Cliff Floyd is the worst human being on the planet? I'm not arguing that the injury itself is virtuous. I''m saying what he did (continue to exert himself on a leg that would have caused most players to lie down on the dirt and call for their mommies) is virtuous. And, obviously, extremely stupid, too.

Nymr83 Dec 07 2006 12:12 PM

="iramets"]Disadvantages to trading Bannister: 1) the guy seemed to be dedicated, even to the extent of incurring an injury he could have ameliorated by placing his own interests beforethose of the team. You want guys with his special brand of dedication. plenty of guys are dedicated, particularly those who know they're headed back to AAA if they aren't. 2) the guy did a decent job for you last spring. Forgetting that he might be owed anything for this performance, he pitched pretty well under difficult conditions, at a time you badly needed stability in your rotation. You want guys who can cope with pressure, and he seemed unusually capable of handling pressure. he got very lucky very often, and even when he pitched well he ran his pitch count up so high that he couldnt go deep into a game, he pitched in April and May with low expectations and you're calling that pressure? give me a break. 3) You still have an unsettled rotation. You might just need a # 5 starter, and Bannister comes cheap. Vargas and Williams are cheap too and have the same if not more upside. Of course, behaving decently is nice, too, but no one expects human decency from any corporation. This move just seems unnecessarily and gratuitously cold-hearted, and for a very dubious advantage. human decency? you're an idiot, its not like they got the guy blacklisted from baseball, he'll still be earning more money than any of us next year, get over it.

Vic Sage Dec 07 2006 12:16 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 07 2006 04:24 PM

83, i think you could disagree with Ira without calling him an idiot. Why don't you just stick to calling me a socialist?

Edgy DC Dec 07 2006 12:19 PM

Yeah, please lay off of the ad hominem attacks. Goes for Elster also, who's been too quick on the trigger recently. I'm having a crapshit day and I'm not in a mood to spend the rest of it bumping to the Red Light.

iramets Dec 07 2006 12:21 PM

Nymr83 wrote: you're an idiot Thanks for that insight into my true nature. I am an idiot, however, with a pretty good memory. I remember fans last spring speaking of Bannister with a lot of admiration for how collected he seemed after having been thrust into the rotation, and how he dealt with some difficult spots. After he got hurt and you had plenty of starting pitching late in the season, not so much. You obviously were one of the few Met fans who didn't appreciate Banister's pitching or his character, and when he was 2-1 with a decent ERA (when he got hurt) you were yelling "Let's lose this bum--what a lousy pitcher he is!" I just didn't hear you at the time, I guess.

TheOldMole Dec 07 2006 12:51 PM

Vic, you $&#)(*#^ socialist!

G-Fafif Dec 07 2006 02:27 PM

Um, as for memories of Bannister... September against the Dodgers, mopup behind a mess of Trachsel's making. When he was announced into the game, no buzz of any sort. He was the feelgood story of five months earlier and now he was a September afterthought. Too bad. He and Jeremi/Geremi G. were the only two starters I didn't see in person. If anybody who wasn't a season-ticket holder collected all thirteen, that's quite a set.

Nymr83 Dec 07 2006 04:21 PM

iramets wrote: ="Nymr83"] you're an idiot Thanks for that insight into my true nature. I am an idiot, however, with a pretty good memory. I remember fans last spring speaking of Bannister with a lot of admiration for how collected he seemed after having been thrust into the rotation, and how he dealt with some difficult spots. After he got hurt and you had plenty of starting pitching late in the season, not so much. You obviously were one of the few Met fans who didn't appreciate Banister's pitching or his character, and when he was 2-1 with a decent ERA (when he got hurt) you were yelling "Let's lose this bum--what a lousy pitcher he is!" I just didn't hear you at the time, I guess. i have better things to do than rumage through old threads, but i'm sure that even if i was praising the results i was warning of the vast number of walks and pitches. trading bannister was a good example of selling high, something Minaya seems to have a talent for

Edgy DC Dec 10 2006 08:45 PM

Lest it be forgotten, Bannister came to the Mets with a fallback career as a professional photographer. Which of these d'ye think is Megan Bannister?

TransMonk Dec 10 2006 08:57 PM

Kansas City?!?

Gwreck Dec 10 2006 10:58 PM

G-Fafif wrote: Um, as for memories of Bannister... September against the Dodgers, mopup behind a mess of Trachsel's making. When he was announced into the game, no buzz of any sort. He was the feelgood story of five months earlier and now he was a September afterthought. Too bad. He and Jeremi/Geremi G. were the only two starters I didn't see in person. If anybody who wasn't a season-ticket holder collected all thirteen, that's quite a set. That wasn't his first appearance back though. He had started a game in August when Glavine was dealing the the finger issue. He remained on the roster for the rest of the year -- seeing action only two more times: the mopup you mentioned as well as pitching mopup after Pedro's last start.