Feeling Good? Feeling Great!
Thirteen over. At long last. After my bitching about the Mets' inability to get over the 12-game hump on Wednesday, our boys responded with a dominating win over the Diamonbacks in Arizona to move 13 games over for the first time all year.
Thirteen games over for the first time in 6 years, actually, but hey, who's counting?
So I'm feeling a hell of a lot better than I was on Wednesday. I'm not going to claim temporary insanity or anything, but the situation has changed dramatically in the 48 hours since my Wednesday polemic.
What exactly has changed? Here's a brief list:
1. The Braves are now 3 games under .500 and 8 games out of first place.
One of the frustrations articulated on Wednesday was our inability to run away with the division, to bury rivals like Atlanta and Philadelphia who have played mediocre baseball for the first two and a half months of the season.
Neither team is buried per se, but Atlanta is coming close and I'm not aware of any reason why they should improve dramatically enough to make a real run at the division (other than the fact that they're the Braves and winning the division is what they do).
After several years of watching middling Mets teams trick us into thinking they were contenders actual in June or July, here's the way I look at it.
I used to say, hey, the Mets are 5 games out, that's not so much, we can overcome that! And that's true. A 5-game lead in the division is certainly surpassable.
The issue, however, that I only came to appreciate a year or two ago is that there is a bigger difference between the Mets team at .500 and the Braves team that was 10 games over than the 5 games separating them in the standings.
A team playing .500 ball is perfectly decent, but it's not a legitimate contender. The team that's 10 games over has won significantly more often than it's lost. Ultimately, there's not much reason to suspect that either team will change its stripes after 2-and-a-half months.
Teams like the Astros last year or the A's seemingly every year are exceptions to a decidedly sobering rule: at the end of the day, your record is a damningly accurate reflection of how good you are.
Believe me, I'm not saying the Braves are done. I'm not saying they can't come back. I'm just saying that here we are: the Braves have played 61 games and won 29 of them. Just marinate on that for a moment.
2. The back of the rotation is paying dividends (finally).
Ask anyone, ANYONE, following the Mets this year and they'll tell you the biggest issue with the club has been the inconsistency (or general shittiness) of all starting pitchers not named Tom Glavine or Pedro Martinez.
Jose Lima and Jeremi Gonzalez were more than the epitome of our back-of-the-rotation deficiency, they were like cries for help. Something needed to change.
Two weeks later, things have changed. We've just had a week in which Steve Trachsel (No. 3), El Duque (No. 4), and Alay Soler (No. 5) pitched spectacularly while Pedro and Glavine pitched like shit. My god have things changed.
Now, nobody expects this past week to become the norm. We all expect Glavine 2.0 to be Glavine 2.0. We all expect Pedro to be Pedro.
But what happened this past week simply could not have happened in the days of Lima and Gonzalez. Trachsel dominated the Giants. Soler dominated the Dodgers. El Duque really dominated the Diamondbacks.
Some ballplayers are fond of saying that every game is the same, that a win's a win and a loss is a loss.
That's bullshit.
You can't tell me that the O.O.T.G.C.O.A.T. (http://yankees2000.blogspot.com/2005/11/memories-of-ootgcoat.html) wasn't a bigger win than, say, that game we won over the Cubs that one time... you remember.
And for a team like the Mets who have trotted out shitty pitcher after shitty pitcher following Pedro and Tommy (and Trachsel, I guess), you can't tell me that the performances by Soler and El Duque weren't a real shot in the arm for everyone on the club.
We have a chance to win with our 4 and 5 guys on the hill. That's as important a change in the Mets' fortunes as any you're likely to see all season.
3. My cold is gone.
Wednesday morning I felt like shit. As bad as I felt, Pedro had pitched even worse the night before. It was a bad combination. I had to vent.
But here we are now, my cold is gone, my Friday is here, and the Mets are playing good baseball.
Trax gets the ball tonight, Soler tomorrow. We've got a shot.
- A.F.O.M.G.
PS.. The Kaz Matsui Era may be drawing to a close, Mark Hale in the New York Post is reporting (Link: http://www.nypost.com/sports/mets/67245.htm).
For those worried about what roster move awaited Xavier Nady's return from the DL, it seems that a trade of Kaz or his outright release is a definite possibility.
That doesn't answer the question of what happens to our outfield once Nady returns, as we now have 4 starters, but at least a little part of the mystery appears to be clearing up.
Thirteen games over for the first time in 6 years, actually, but hey, who's counting?
So I'm feeling a hell of a lot better than I was on Wednesday. I'm not going to claim temporary insanity or anything, but the situation has changed dramatically in the 48 hours since my Wednesday polemic.
What exactly has changed? Here's a brief list:
1. The Braves are now 3 games under .500 and 8 games out of first place.
One of the frustrations articulated on Wednesday was our inability to run away with the division, to bury rivals like Atlanta and Philadelphia who have played mediocre baseball for the first two and a half months of the season.
Neither team is buried per se, but Atlanta is coming close and I'm not aware of any reason why they should improve dramatically enough to make a real run at the division (other than the fact that they're the Braves and winning the division is what they do).
After several years of watching middling Mets teams trick us into thinking they were contenders actual in June or July, here's the way I look at it.I used to say, hey, the Mets are 5 games out, that's not so much, we can overcome that! And that's true. A 5-game lead in the division is certainly surpassable.
The issue, however, that I only came to appreciate a year or two ago is that there is a bigger difference between the Mets team at .500 and the Braves team that was 10 games over than the 5 games separating them in the standings.
A team playing .500 ball is perfectly decent, but it's not a legitimate contender. The team that's 10 games over has won significantly more often than it's lost. Ultimately, there's not much reason to suspect that either team will change its stripes after 2-and-a-half months.
Teams like the Astros last year or the A's seemingly every year are exceptions to a decidedly sobering rule: at the end of the day, your record is a damningly accurate reflection of how good you are.
Believe me, I'm not saying the Braves are done. I'm not saying they can't come back. I'm just saying that here we are: the Braves have played 61 games and won 29 of them. Just marinate on that for a moment.
2. The back of the rotation is paying dividends (finally).
Ask anyone, ANYONE, following the Mets this year and they'll tell you the biggest issue with the club has been the inconsistency (or general shittiness) of all starting pitchers not named Tom Glavine or Pedro Martinez.
Jose Lima and Jeremi Gonzalez were more than the epitome of our back-of-the-rotation deficiency, they were like cries for help. Something needed to change.
Two weeks later, things have changed. We've just had a week in which Steve Trachsel (No. 3), El Duque (No. 4), and Alay Soler (No. 5) pitched spectacularly while Pedro and Glavine pitched like shit. My god have things changed.
Now, nobody expects this past week to become the norm. We all expect Glavine 2.0 to be Glavine 2.0. We all expect Pedro to be Pedro.But what happened this past week simply could not have happened in the days of Lima and Gonzalez. Trachsel dominated the Giants. Soler dominated the Dodgers. El Duque really dominated the Diamondbacks.
Some ballplayers are fond of saying that every game is the same, that a win's a win and a loss is a loss.
That's bullshit.
You can't tell me that the O.O.T.G.C.O.A.T. (http://yankees2000.blogspot.com/2005/11/memories-of-ootgcoat.html) wasn't a bigger win than, say, that game we won over the Cubs that one time... you remember.
And for a team like the Mets who have trotted out shitty pitcher after shitty pitcher following Pedro and Tommy (and Trachsel, I guess), you can't tell me that the performances by Soler and El Duque weren't a real shot in the arm for everyone on the club.
We have a chance to win with our 4 and 5 guys on the hill. That's as important a change in the Mets' fortunes as any you're likely to see all season.
3. My cold is gone.
Wednesday morning I felt like shit. As bad as I felt, Pedro had pitched even worse the night before. It was a bad combination. I had to vent.
But here we are now, my cold is gone, my Friday is here, and the Mets are playing good baseball.
Trax gets the ball tonight, Soler tomorrow. We've got a shot.
- A.F.O.M.G.
PS.. The Kaz Matsui Era may be drawing to a close, Mark Hale in the New York Post is reporting (Link: http://www.nypost.com/sports/mets/67245.htm).
For those worried about what roster move awaited Xavier Nady's return from the DL, it seems that a trade of Kaz or his outright release is a definite possibility.
That doesn't answer the question of what happens to our outfield once Nady returns, as we now have 4 starters, but at least a little part of the mystery appears to be clearing up.





8 Comments:
we are the best team in the national league east, PERIOD. are you really afraid of the braves still? if they end up winning the east, it will be because WE COLLAPSE, not because they beat us. in all seriousness, to update the song: we get the hits, we score the runs, we don't crack under pressure, we have depth across the board now, we have mid-tier players to deal if need be, we have financial space to spend money/take on contracts, and we are just the strongest club in the east. personally, the only team that in a playoff situation i would be dead scared of is the chicago white sox... we can lose to anybody of course, but thats the only team i can honestly say is a better team than us.
"Trachsel dominated the Giants. Soler dominated the Dodgers. El Duque really dominated the Diamondbacks."
Look at those three teams. Regardless of their relative positions in the NL, they suck. SUCK.
Hate to be a hater, but if you think Glavine and Pedro are gonna hold up all season long, you're kidding yourself. Ditto with Reyes.
And let's be sure of this: the Mets have gotten some serious, serious breaks all season. That can't last, either.
name a better NL east team then champ
Anonymous:
1. As regards the Giants, the Dodgers, and the Diamondbacks, let me start by quoting another part of my piece:
"Teams like the Astros last year or the A's seemingly every year are exceptions to a decidedly sobering rule: at the end of the day, your record is a damningly accurate reflection of how good you are."
Arizona (34-26), L.A. (33-27) and San Francisco (32-28) would all be second-place clubs in the National League East. Are they the cream of baseball? Of course not. But they do have the 4th, 5th, and 6th best records, respectively, in the National League. National League teams are, of course, the ones the Mets play. If you don't think it's fair to measure ourselves against them, then we just don't agree. If you think they all suck, I say their record is ultimately a fair reflection of how good they are.
But fine, you don't think they're actually any good. Let me present a different metric: The Dodgers are the best hitting team in the NL (4th best in all of baseball, actually); the D-Backs are the 4th best (11th overall); the Giants are 8th (15th overall).
So when you say they suck, I don't really know what leg you're standing on. Please explain, I'm curious.
2. Glavine, Pedro, and Reyes.
Glavine has made at least 33 starts in each of the past 10 seasons.
Pedro has made 29 starts each of the past 4. For a guy who's perpetually considered an injury risk, he really doesn't get injured all that often.
As for Reyes, look, I call him Mr. Glass because he breaks like glass. At all times I think he's a stiff wind away from the disabled list. But to his credit, before he missed a game against the Dodgers on Wednesday, he had played in 200 straight games, the most any player wearing a Mets uniform had ever played consecutively. He was a legitimate injury risk for years, but I just don't know that it's fair to call him that anymore.
3. The Mets have gotten serious, serious breaks all season.
Please elaborate, I don't really know what you're talking about. Perhaps you're referring to the Mets' record in 1-run games. I'd love it if we could blow more people out, but I take a glass-half full approach to this statistic: I think we've won this many 1-run games because A) we're better than other teams and B) our bullpen is better than most other teams'.
Beyond that, I really can't think of another break the Mets have caught all season. I wouldn't count losing two starting pitchers a break. I wouldn't consider the two-week stretch where the umpires shat on us a break. As far as I can tell, the only break we've caught so far is that two of the teams in our division are decidedly bad, and two others are decidedly mediocre.
An absolute must-read piece about the Milledge hand slapping episode, courtesy of Jim Caple at ESPN.com (hat tip to Ed in Westchester on the MetsGeek comment board for the link): http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/offbase/060607
I think anonymous just got shat on...
apparently the guys who do espn.com power rankings are in agreement with ME
if we manage to win tonight with shitty on the hill i will be pretty dang pleased...
ima little late but........go monroe!
Post a Comment
<< Home