Questions

(Note: The latest in our Section 423 series on the Knicks appears immediately following this post from A.F.O.M.G.)

There's not a hell of a whole lot going on in Met land today. That leaves me with an opportunity to tie up some loose ends.

Or well, I may not be able to tie them all up, but I will be able to raise a bunch of questions that seem pertinent to me. Maybe one of you can help answer them. Maybe I don't want to know the answers. Oh me, oh my.

So in no particular order, can I just ask...

What is going to happen to Shea Stadium once Citi Field is complete?

I was over at this website chronicling the development of the new Citi Field when I thought, wait a tick, this stadium is going up right next door to the old one! I know the Mets will continue playing at Shea through to 2008, and I know that Citi Field needs to be ready for the start of 2009 -- what the bugger are they going to do when it's time to say goodbye to Shea?

We've all seen stadium destruction footage before, haven't we? Old Three Rivers Stadium in Pittsburgh was demolished that way, but it wasn't standing directly next to another living, breathing structure.

There's nothing stopping them from tearing Shea down brick by brick, and all things considered, that might be the best way to go about getting rid of the old girl. I don't think I could have beared to watch an explosion fell the old girl. Somehow a gradual destruction seems more humane.

Is this seriously the rotation we're going to enter the season with?

Glavine, El Duque, Maine, All-or-Nothing Ollie, and Pelfrey/Humber, eh? I'm sorry, this just isn't a playoff-caliber rotation. I've written about this before, and there were some interesting opinions expressed on the comment board. Coop has confidence in Oliver Perez. Patrick Reis wants to see the kids play. Nails hates Victor Zambrano. Etc.

Over on MetsBlog, the conversation has turned to Tomo Ohka, Tony Armas and Rodrigo Lopez. Ohka doesn't seem like a horrible option to pursue, but Armas does nothing for me, and evidently the asking price for Lopez is growing increasingly incommensurate with his performance last season.

I realize Lopez was better the two previous seasons, but still, I'm not looking to give up anything substantial for a guy who went 9-18 last year with a 5.90 ERA -- our reclamation quota begins and ends with Perez, as far as I'm concerned.

Where is the market for Steve Trachsel?

The ace of the Mets' staff in 2006, Trachsel appears to be the victim of the greatest act of owner collusion since Rafael Palmeiro. Seriously, this guy won 15 games for the division champs last year, people! His name even came up in Cy Young Award talks, at least in certain circles.

There's a part of me that wonders whether Mets brass ever considers bringing him back.

Is anything cooler than cyber beef?

It's Cousin Tonks vs. Cheddar Ben on the comment board. We haven't seen these kinds of fireworks since Sip threatened to fight someone who teased him about his pen name.

Ugh.

Is there a better comedy on television right now than The Office?

I've had a marathon through the first two seasons the past 10 days, and cot damn, what a show. I'd seen the vast majority of these episodes already, but watching them sequentially like that really added to my understanding of some of the key relationships and dynamics on the show. Good times.

Anyway though, I don't watch a lot of TV. Seriously, is there anything better? (And please, please, whatever you do, don't say "Yeah, the British version." I'm sorry, I tried, I just couldn't get into it.)

24: Better live or on DVD?

January 14 is finally, mercifully, the day we've all been waiting for. Jack Bauer, your hero and mine, is back to kick ass and take names.

A debate I've had with some friends: is it better to watch this show on DVD or week-to-week? A lot of people say DVD, and there's probably something to that, but I don't think I could resist. Plus, having something to look forward to Monday nights is too essential.

Do the Knicks set out to fall behind by 15 points every game?

I don't watch all of their games, but I'm fairly certain that in every single one I've seen they've trailed by 10 to 15 points in the first quarter. It's like clockwork. It would be less of an issue if they just got blown out all the time, but half the time they really make a game of it. Where is that intensity in the first quarter?

Am I wrong, or are the Jets a decidedly more likeable team than the Giants?

I rooted for the Giants pretty heavily last year, but this year, because of my long post-playoff exit downward spiral, I never really got into them. It wasn't a fare-weather thing: even when they were winning I didn't watch, I just didn't have it in me.

I do see the headlines though, and every week it's someone else bitching in the locker room. It's like, I get it, you guys don't like the coach. Chances are he'll be gone next year, in the meantime though, don't you owe it to yourselves and your fans to play out the string?

I haven't been watching but I can't think that 2-6 stretch to end the season was entirely Coughlin's fault. I hope they do well but honestly, I'll be kind of relieved when it's over for them.

The Jets, meanwhile, with the Manginius at the helm and Broadway Chad taking the snaps, now there's a likeable team.

There are 88 days until Opening Day.

Get comfortable.

- A.F.O.M.G.

(Images appear courtesy of gothamist.com, mlb.com, and laerer.vucaarhus.dk)