|
In a report for MLB.com, Marty Noble explains that the Mets will not be disciplined by Major League Baseball for not adhering to the the rule that all teams must have at least four regulars in the starting lineups of exhibition games.
@matthewcerrone on Twitter
Follow me on
Mets on Twitter
MetsBlog.com is owned and operated by Matthew Cerrone.
MetsBlog.com publishes both rumor and opinion, as well as accurately reported information from other sources. Information on MetsBlog.com may contain errors or inaccuracies - links to content and the quotation of material from other news sources are not the responsibility of
MetsBlog.com.
MetsBlog.com and Matthew Cerrone are not responsible for what is written by non-MetsBlog.com writers within the site's comment's section.
Interesting… i never heard of that rule before…
It makes sense though…
it does?
isn’t there a MLB rule that excuses any team that has signed Moisty Alou either/or/and Orlando Hernandez from any said “regular” stipulations?
Check your rulebooks, i think it’s there.
its like the rule that says “Comments wont nest below this level”. There’s always an exception.
I have no idea, but that was the funniest thing I have read/heard/seen all day! Nice job.
…and I was referring to your second comment, although the first was funny too.
well, in a way… otherwise, some managers wouldn’t start many projected starters and the tv ratings would be down cause not many people want to watch a bunch of minor league players who are 30 years old.
Why does this make sense? Isn’t it basically a disadvantage not to play your regulars and get them in shape for the regular season?
I’m guessing this all has to do with money. Tickets are sold for exhibition games and they have to make sure that people don’t pay to watch people they neve heard of. Though it makes sense to get you regulars out there to get into game shape, there’s always the possbility that teams may hold some of their ‘regulars’ back for different reasons and I’m guessing MLB wants to control that sort of thing. Can you believe that MLB is making a decision based on money? wow!
really they aught to just not schedule teams so far away from each other to play this early in the spring. Later in the spring guys need to play every day so they are more likely to go.
The Mets and Tigers seemed to start the exhibition season on the early side, maybe the Mets should have just not agreed to play that game at all.
The Dodgers, Rays, Marlins, Orioles, and others are much closer and could be played more often.
Is Mary Noble Marty Noble’s Wife???
Mary Noble is actually Marty’s cross-dressing alter ego.
Shawn Green retired…
maybe from baseball, but he’s only like 36, he will have to work again.
hate to do this, but that was reported on this site over 12 hours ago
Hate to do this, but I really don’t like you. Just thought I’d throw that out there. You pretty much seem to be a condescending a$$..
Why does every single post you make have to be taking some sort of jab at someone? Seriously. Your baseball knowledge is impressive, no doubt. But it seems as if every post you make in one way or another is in an attempt to put somebody down. And you’ve been doing it for a long time. It’s old.
I dont get what the big deal is. Every pitcher the Mets used is on the 40 man roster as were most of the ‘bench guys’ who started. The only guideline right now is the 40 man roster and the Mets sent at least 8 of those guys to this game. So whats the problem?
Right now some of the Met’s are scared of the ball. The key to winning is overcoming fear of the ball. Get back out there guys.
But … but… that ball – it’s HARD. It can HURT you! Take you down to 85%, easy.
its a scary ball. but if you are afraid to take your at-bats you also can’t reap the benefits of success. I think we will go to 85 percent though because of just how “off,” el-duque is.
I was at the game yesterday and it was bad. The Tigers had all their regulars and the Mets had no one on the field. It was like a split squad game. Terrible!! They should of sent at least Reyes or Wright. A lot of Mets fans were there and Andy Machado at 3B, Ouch….
best teams are
tigers
mets
red sox (without schilling not as good)
Forgot the Angels…
Check out the squad the Tigers brought to St Lucie last spring. It was just as thin as the one the Mets took there.
sports.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=270228121
Granderson
Neifi Perez
Omar Infante
Marcus Thames
Sean Casey
Vance Wilson
R. Rayburn
Hessman
B. Watson (who?)
I count one starter, five bench players, and three AAA guys, and the one starter Granderson played DH instead of CF. How dare the Tigers complain about what the Mets did.
cant say vance wasn’t in there. vance was in there.
i think the rule is new this year or something
that doesnt mean that the guys didnt come n just sit on the bench though
I would love to see a discussion thread about this.
I think, that when we look back on the Mets, say 10 years from now, that the 07 collapse, will be viewed as one of the best things that happened to the Mets.
Here is why.
Had we limped into the playoffs, I doubt that we would have gone much further than the first round… and we would have been less willing to give up the farm for Santana.
If we hadn’t acquired Santana, we would be feeling “ok” about our mets, but certainly not in the 8.5 + “confidence.
Would they have taken the same attitude in the off season to get ready? It seems that the “collapse” has driven more than one Met to begin their routines much earlier, loose weight, and/or completely tear down their approach and start over.
We could go very deep this year into the playoffs, and I am not sure that it would have happened unless we had the unfortunate 07.
Thoughts?
Daktari
my thought is that you’re getting ahead of yourself.
My thought is the 2008 Mets will take time to find their way due to a combination of the unresolved issues from last year’s collapse and the unrealistic expectations related to Santana’s signing. How many games did Santana win again last year? That’s right, look it up. Sure he’s pitching in the NL, but he is also human and may need time to adjust. Great signing if you don’t mind giving up the future, but they still have to go out and play 162.
I wouldn’t exactly call 4 prospects, none of which were truly elite, “giving up the future”. Seriously, what’s the rate at which a team’s top 10 prospects turn into perennial All-Stars/game-changing players? Maybe 5%? I know we all love our prospects, but any way you slice it, this was a great trade for the Mets, and the farm system is not that much worse than it already was.
I do agree, however, that there will be an adjustment period for this team, particularly the new parts. People ecpecting the Mets to open up a ten game lead by mid-May are going to be sorely disappointed.