What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

T

Terrierbyassociation

Fight Cancer, Wherever You Find It
The week ended brilliantly, with the Wilponzi scheme finally beginning to unravel.

The Wilpons held a press conference stating they were looking to sell a minority stake, 20-25% of the team. Some reports have them being willing to sell up to 30%, but the family won't sell a controlling stake.

I think this is all posturing. Who is willing to hand over that kind of coin and not get a say in decisions?

No one. They obviously are desperate to come out publicly and say they are taking bids on minority stakes. Hopefully someone comes over the top and buys the controlling share of the franchise.

Someone like Mark Cuban.

Sadly, we cannot overcome the failure that is CitiField. It's built and the team will just have to live with its deficiencies. It might be beautiful to look at, but it's far too small capacity wise, too big fence wise (especially in left), and has lots of obstructed seats. Not Populous' finest achievement.

It has nice food though. :rolleyes:
 
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Terrierbyassociation said:
It might be beautiful to look at, but it's far too small capacity wise, too big fence wise (especially in left)
Click to expand...

I don't believe any of those three things. Citi is as typical a 2010 stadium as Shea was a 1965 stadium -- it fits the aesthetic and economic model of its time and like Shea it will wind up settling into the vast mid-range of ballparks with a slight tendency to depress scoring.

More on the proposed sale (and its many problems). A ray of pure sunshine for Mets fans:

t’s plain, despite the team’s official line at the moment, that the built-in dynamics of the situation will make it difficult for the Wilpons to retain ownership, particularly if the financial pressures are as huge as has been reported, either from Picard or from Madoff losses themselves. The Wilpons effectively announced today that they need money. For those who have it, the motivation to buy a minority stake is minimal if there's a perception that by simply waiting, the Wilpons will be forced to sell their entire stake in the Mets.

There is recent precedent for that dark scenario. In 2009, under-pressure venture capitalist Tom Hicks announced he would sell a minority stake in the Texas Rangers. Hicks said at the time, "I've been quietly looking for minority investors to come back into the ownership of the Rangers as a way to be prudent in a bad economy. At the end of the day, I'll still have 51 to 60 percent of the ballclub and have new partners. That doesn't change anything.”

A year later, with no one willing to bail him out in exchange for limited say in the ball club, Hicks sold his entire stake in the Rangers.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

My biggest issues with Citi is that they made a stadium with 39K seats...yet obstructed views. They'll point to revenue later, when the stadium should have had at least 5K more seats.

Edit: besides that, the stadium is never going to be as neutral as Shea was in its last years when the wind pattern completely changed with Citi being built behind it.

I don't know how anyone can say that with a straight face. It's not that it depresses scoring slightly, it radically depresses home runs.
 
Last edited:
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Terrierbyassociation said:
My biggest issues with Citi is that they made a stadium with 39K seats...yet obstructed views. They'll point to revenue later, when the stadium should have had at least 5K more seats.
Click to expand...

They made it smaller for forced scarcity to push up all prices and increase net revenue (the velvet rope model). Since all the clubs are doing it I strongly suspect they have the studies to show it works.

We have no idea what it will do to scoring in the long run -- small sample size. It may add 2 triples for every home run lost.

And even if it did radically decrease the long ball the way the Astrodome once did, that means it will be attractive to pitchers to the exact extent that it is unattractive to hitters. I'd certainly rather they err that way than the laughable travesty of Citizens Bank Ballpark.
 
Last edited:
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

They should have just built a straight up neutral ballpark. I hate ballparks in either vein, either depressing scoring or increasing scoring. Why do we have to choose between the bandbox or a pitcher's haven? Why do we have to pick one or the other? Why can't we have a stadium like Shea?

And the velvet rope theory doesn't work in NY. The Yankees realized that.

And stop saying things like it "might add two triples for each HR lost." I mean talk about just pulling something out of your butt, triples are already significantly rarer than HRs, so sorry, that's complete ****. Even if the triple rate is higher, it's not going to make up for the depression on HR rates.

Let me tell you a secret. In the free agent market, the best pitchers don't care about pitching in a bandbox or not. It's nice having a pitcher's park if you are a small market team, you get some cheap fly-ball tendency starters and you can compete. If you're a big market team, you don't get a benefit because you want better than inning eaters on a contending team, a team that wants to win titles.

They want to be on a team that contends, not on a team that has a home park that will pad their stats: it will only depress your chances at getting sluggers to come because they know their raw numbers are what gets them their *next* contract.

High payroll teams in big markets don't have high OBP/low SLG lineups. That doesn't succeed in the end.
 
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Kepler said:
I'd certainly rather they err that way than the laughable travesty of Citizens Bank Ballpark.
Click to expand...

Yeah i'd kill to have the Mets' last four years over what the Phillies have done:rolleyes::mad:
 
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Terrierbyassociation said:
And stop saying things like it "might add two triples for each HR lost." I mean talk about just pulling something out of your butt, triples are already significantly rarer than HRs, so sorry, that's complete ****. Even if the triple rate is higher, it's not going to make up for the depression on HR rates.
Click to expand...

Your exaggeration meter is broken. If I had been serious I would had written "doubles."

Give it a few seasons. This time last year people thought DWright would never hit 10 HR again because of the wall. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Mets get to host the 2013 All-Star game apparently.
 
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Kepler said:
Yeah, because that was the ballpark. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Phillies didn't seem to have a problem convincing Cliff Lee to come to Citizens Bank Park and how can you not say that park hasn't helped make their offense one of the best in the league. The team is built for the long ball and guys like Howard, Utley, Werth, Ibanez, Burrell etc thrived there.
 
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Kepler said:
Your exaggeration meter is broken. If I had been serious I would had written "doubles."

Give it a few seasons. This time last year people thought DWright would never hit 10 HR again because of the wall. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Who is people? It was because he got messed up by the worst hitting coach in Mets history and the mandate that we go opposite field. He lost his killer instinct to pull the ball when he should. Became too enamored by going opposite field and then couldn't cope with the fact that he couldn't yard to right center like he could at Shea.

Had nothing to do with the left field wall.
 
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Terrierbyassociation said:
Who is people? It was because he got messed up by the worst hitting coach in Mets history and the mandate that we go opposite field. He lost his killer instinct to pull the ball when he should. Became too enamored by going opposite field and then couldn't cope with the fact that he couldn't yard to right center like he could at Shea.

Had nothing to do with the left field wall.
Click to expand...

Which didn't stop the chorus of Chicken Little MSM and fan pronouncements about the field (you may have been blissfully unexposed to them but I had to read those dumb complaints all winter long on AA along with the patient, intelligent rebuttals).

Not directed to you personally, but generally speaking my patience ends when I hear people start to conflate the Mets' recent crappiness with the field they play on (this is usually accompanied by dire predictions that if they don't reconfigure the outfield and everybody's favorite trope "bring in the fences" then the End Times are at hand. I don't buy it. We are terrible because our owners and management have made terrible decisions in every aspect of the baseball side of the operation for 5 or 6 seasons. With a new front office there is at least hope, although with the Wilpons still in place that hope is always drop-shadowed by the fear that their idiocy is still lurking back there. The field is not even on the first page of my littany of complaints about the Mets.
 
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Beyond the Box Score ranks the NL East rotations:

1) Phillies: Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee, Cole Hamels, Roy Oswalt, Joe Blanton, Kyle Kendrick, Vance Worley

2) Braves: Tim Hudson, Tommy Hanson, Derek Lowe, Jair Jurrjens, Mike Minor, Brandon Beachy, Kenshin Kawakami, Rodrigo Lopez

3) Marlins: Josh Johnson, Ricky Nolasco, Anibal Sanchez, Javier Vazquez, Chris Volstad, Alex Sanabia, Sean West

4) Mets: Johan Santana, Jonathan Niese, Mike Pelfrey, Chris Young, R.A. Dickey, Chris Capuano, Dillon Gee

5) Nationals: Livan Hernandez, Jason Marquis, John Lannan, Tom Gorzelanny, Jordan Zimmermann, Yunesky Maya, J.D. Martin, Chad Gaudin
 
Re: New York Mets 2011: No expectations except expect to be disappointed somehow

Much in keeping with the thread title, Santana may be done for the year, or there may be noting to it at all and he's on track.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top