<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/513560</link>
		<description>Comments by metsocrat</description>
<item>
<title>MetsBlog.com : Note: 100 Men Left on Base</title>
<link>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/20/note-100-men-left-on-base/#IDComment19437071</link>
<description>Exactly. It&amp;#039;s frustrating because having a lot of runners on means that there will be games where the team goes 1 for 12 and worse trying to drive them in. But overall, it&amp;#039;s a pretty good predictive indicator that the team has a good offense, will score a lot of runs, and should win a lot of games.  It&amp;#039;s a long season, after all.  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:48:48 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/20/note-100-men-left-on-base/#IDComment19437071</guid>
</item><item>
<title>MetsBlog.com : Note: 100 Men Left on Base</title>
<link>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/20/note-100-men-left-on-base/#IDComment19437057</link>
<description>fxcarden, I agree with you. I just think the sample size is too small right now to make dire conclusions  :-)  As you said, if the Mets are stil underperforming their expected offensive output come later in the season, it will be a real concern.  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:48:24 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/20/note-100-men-left-on-base/#IDComment19437057</guid>
</item><item>
<title>MetsBlog.com : Note: 100 Men Left on Base</title>
<link>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/20/note-100-men-left-on-base/#IDComment19434866</link>
<description>I&amp;#039;m pretty sure this is a case where what seems frustrating and troublesome in the near-term is, as Jerry suggested, a good thing actually. In general, team LOB (left on base) correlates fairly well with overall offensive success. You might want to check this out:  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7510&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?art...&lt;/a&gt;   </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:48:07 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/20/note-100-men-left-on-base/#IDComment19434866</guid>
</item><item>
<title>MetsBlog.com : Post-Game: Brewers 4 Mets 2</title>
<link>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/19/post-game-brewers-4-mets-2/#IDComment19431485</link>
<description>Yes, and I&amp;#039;m sure he knows the correct score of the game and I&amp;#039;m sure that he knows that the fan interference actually helped the Mets, but none of this, IMO, excuses what is often a complete lack of attention to detail: keep in mind that many fans who do NOT know these things *rely* on metsblog.com as a source of information. To regularly feed them incorrect information does everyone a disservice. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:15:58 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/19/post-game-brewers-4-mets-2/#IDComment19431485</guid>
</item><item>
<title>MetsBlog.com : Post-Game: Brewers 4 Mets 2</title>
<link>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/19/post-game-brewers-4-mets-2/#IDComment19400613</link>
<description>Matt, seriously, where do you come up with this stuff? It&amp;#039;s like you watch a totally different game.  The fan interference did *not* hurt the Mets, it gave them an out that they might not have otherwise had. And os the home run following it is immaterial.  Todd Coffey is *not* the Brewers closer, even if he did close the game today for the save.  And, most of all, letting Tatis swing away in the 8th inning with quality bunters like Castillo and Cora on the bunch was pretty much unforgivable. Tatis has done nothing yet this year to justify such a move, and Castillo and Cora have done everything possible to justify the smart move.  Metsocrat </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 03:03:07 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.metsblog.com/2009/04/19/post-game-brewers-4-mets-2/#IDComment19400613</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>