Everything's Not Lost Part 88: Why the Mets are More Than Ok
I strongly disagree with AFOMG and most Met fans out there.
Now lets rewind.
I had wings and beers (Sick!) with my best friend from kindergarten last night. We hadn't really hung out in 17 years but thanks to Facebook we were able to make it happen. Here's to social networking.
We talked about a lot of things. His twin brothers, now aged 11, who I had never met; Football, his love; and then baseball.
JJ is a Yankee fan- who doesn't really care- who lives a life surrounded by Met fans who do. Sound familiar?
His question: What do you think about Yankee fans like me?
I laughed.
5 years ago I would have jumped all over this kid. 5 years ago shit like this ruled my life. A Mets win and I was in a good mood. A Mets loss and I was in a bad mood. Meet a Yankee fan and I immediately question their morals. Was this kid picked on as a kid and now in need of the Yankees to make him feel good. You get the picture.
Between getting old, living outside of New York, watching the "New Mets bandwagon" develop and working for another team, I have lost a lot of that umph. Today, I feel like a "cool dad."
I watch most games, follow the team, and enjoy ever minute. But other things mean more to me. This was not always the case.
This change has one advantage. I do feel a lot more objective. I have a much easier time looking at the big picture as opposed to reacting to the smaller one. That is what New York does and that is especially what the New York Media does.
One day we hate Scott Schoenweis. The next day we love him.
One day we question which Johan Santana we got. The next day we love our ace.
One day Willie is the best manager in the game. The next day, Willie is the scapegoat.
I understand AFOMG's sentiments and respect the guy's opinion more than anyone's. He constantly addresses long term themes as opposed to short term shortcomings. He is smarter than every writer in the city but here is where I disagree with him.
.........
The 2007 Mets are not the 2008 Mets.
You simply can not compare a team with the best pitcher in the game with a team that did not have him.
The 2008 Mets have been extremely frustrating.
"They have yet to break out."
"They don't show emotion."
"We need to blow this team up."
I just don't see it.
If Jose Reyes, David Wright and Carlos Beltran were 35 it would be one thing. But they are not. They are all in the middle of or approaching their prime.
So unless you think these guys are done, then we are looking at a team thats 4 games over .500 who have a terribly under-achieving core of their offense.
The fact is this.
The Mets have as good a 1-2-3 as there is in baseball.
Yes, it's even as good as everyone's new darlings, the new dbacks' Webb-Haren-Owings.
And when you have this type of pitching a team can never be bad. You have an above .500 team based on starting pitching alone.
And that's all the Mets have been thus far. An above .500 team. John Maine and Johan Santana have carried this team to where it was.
Carlos Delgado may be lost. He may be a 20-70-.250 guy. So be it.
But fact is this team is 4 games over .500 with a bad Wright, Reyes and Beltran and no Moises Alou, an old guy who should be done, but has proven when healthy he can be an effective middle of the lineup guy.
The Phillies are going to lose a ton of games because of a very bad rotation.
The Braves have already lost one pitcher to age and are depending on a couple of other guys born way too close to 1970.
But the Mets have three stud arms on the right side of 30. And because of that, this team will be more than alright.
To compete against age is hard. To compete against slumps is another story.
Is Reyes done? Is Beltran done? Is Wright done?
As long as this is not the case, the Mets are the best team in the division and a top team in the league.
We can't judge this team until our lineup hits to its potential. Right now, we have three all-stars playing average baseball.
Vaya,
Sip
(Pic courtesy of USAtoday.com)
Now lets rewind.
I had wings and beers (Sick!) with my best friend from kindergarten last night. We hadn't really hung out in 17 years but thanks to Facebook we were able to make it happen. Here's to social networking.
We talked about a lot of things. His twin brothers, now aged 11, who I had never met; Football, his love; and then baseball.
JJ is a Yankee fan- who doesn't really care- who lives a life surrounded by Met fans who do. Sound familiar?
His question: What do you think about Yankee fans like me?
I laughed.
5 years ago I would have jumped all over this kid. 5 years ago shit like this ruled my life. A Mets win and I was in a good mood. A Mets loss and I was in a bad mood. Meet a Yankee fan and I immediately question their morals. Was this kid picked on as a kid and now in need of the Yankees to make him feel good. You get the picture.
Between getting old, living outside of New York, watching the "New Mets bandwagon" develop and working for another team, I have lost a lot of that umph. Today, I feel like a "cool dad."
I watch most games, follow the team, and enjoy ever minute. But other things mean more to me. This was not always the case.
This change has one advantage. I do feel a lot more objective. I have a much easier time looking at the big picture as opposed to reacting to the smaller one. That is what New York does and that is especially what the New York Media does.
One day we hate Scott Schoenweis. The next day we love him.
One day we question which Johan Santana we got. The next day we love our ace.
One day Willie is the best manager in the game. The next day, Willie is the scapegoat.
I understand AFOMG's sentiments and respect the guy's opinion more than anyone's. He constantly addresses long term themes as opposed to short term shortcomings. He is smarter than every writer in the city but here is where I disagree with him.
.........
The 2007 Mets are not the 2008 Mets.
You simply can not compare a team with the best pitcher in the game with a team that did not have him.
The 2008 Mets have been extremely frustrating.
"They have yet to break out."
"They don't show emotion."
"We need to blow this team up."
I just don't see it.
If Jose Reyes, David Wright and Carlos Beltran were 35 it would be one thing. But they are not. They are all in the middle of or approaching their prime.
So unless you think these guys are done, then we are looking at a team thats 4 games over .500 who have a terribly under-achieving core of their offense.
The fact is this.
The Mets have as good a 1-2-3 as there is in baseball.
Yes, it's even as good as everyone's new darlings, the new dbacks' Webb-Haren-Owings.
And when you have this type of pitching a team can never be bad. You have an above .500 team based on starting pitching alone.
And that's all the Mets have been thus far. An above .500 team. John Maine and Johan Santana have carried this team to where it was.
Carlos Delgado may be lost. He may be a 20-70-.250 guy. So be it.
But fact is this team is 4 games over .500 with a bad Wright, Reyes and Beltran and no Moises Alou, an old guy who should be done, but has proven when healthy he can be an effective middle of the lineup guy.
The Phillies are going to lose a ton of games because of a very bad rotation.
The Braves have already lost one pitcher to age and are depending on a couple of other guys born way too close to 1970.
But the Mets have three stud arms on the right side of 30. And because of that, this team will be more than alright.
To compete against age is hard. To compete against slumps is another story.
Is Reyes done? Is Beltran done? Is Wright done?
As long as this is not the case, the Mets are the best team in the division and a top team in the league.
We can't judge this team until our lineup hits to its potential. Right now, we have three all-stars playing average baseball.
Vaya,
Sip
(Pic courtesy of USAtoday.com)
posted by Sippy Momo at 1:20 PM
3 Comments:
Everything you write may be true and, in fact, does seem to be true. That being said - and I'm responding less to AFOMG's most recent post and more to the earlier idea that Willie's tenure should come to a close sooner than later - it doesn't address the team's consistent underperformance, which is, at least for me, at the heart of the case against staying the course. I don't doubt that this team can win their division - it's a far weaker division than the guys on Baseball Tonight keep telling us it is. Philly and ATL have bigger structural problems than the Mets. By a lot, probably. The Marlins are going to get exposed over the next 5-10 series. And the Mets, if Pedro can return and stay healthy, will have the best starting rotation in the league for more than half of the year, and the ability to score enough runs to win more than not. None of this is new, and all of this is true. But these facts and the phenomenon of their persistent mediocrity are not mutually exclusive or contradictory observations.
PS. Reyes missed Rick Down and his gin-soaked coaching approach.
PPS. Also, SM, I was very happy to see this morning that you were right re Joe Smith staying up with the big boys. I was very irked with the idea that they had given Sosa an undeserved reprieve. I read it on Metsblog and should have known better than to take it for gospel.
I'm not really sure what you and I disagree on. We seem to agree this team is not as middling as its appeared, and that the fact that they're a few games over .500 in spite of poor production from Reyes and Beltran specifically, but also Wright to a degree, is ultimately a good thing. We also agree it's unfair to say the 2008 Mets are the 2007 Mets, and that ultimately the players deserve the blame more than Willie does. We agree on a lot as far as I can tell.
Now that said, this is a team that has to do better than it has over the past 162 games. I hear you on taking the long view, but I'm not really sure that Willie's the only man for this job. There's no two ways about it, the Mets have underacheived the last two years; in 2006 by not making the World Series, in 2007 by falling short of the playoffs. Some people believe they underacheived in 2005 for that matter. Now they have a team that should easily make the playoffs, for exactly the reasons you laid out. If, as the season progresses, it appears the playoffs are in jeopardy, that's something that needs to be addressed somehow.
If you want to give Willie a longer leash than I did (June 1), fine; dates on a calendar are mostly arbitrary. If you don't think there comes a time when someone has to be held accountable for sustained underperformance, however, I'm not sure that's maturity talking -- it sounds more like indifference.
Sip- Could you please explicate at what point mature Mets fans should call for a shake-up. If I was concerned after 130 games and ready for a change after 150 and if AFOMG was concerned after 162 games and ready for a change after 180, at what point should mature fans with a sense of distance be ready for a change? Does last year's core with the addition of Johan deserve a full season? Is a 162 game season too short a timeframe and a team's core should be trotted out for 5 years with no changes and will have good years and bad years and, if you are confident enough in the core as all of us are, then you just let it play out? I ask all of these questions with 100 percent sincerity. I can see logic in any position even if I'm more willing to shake things up than you.
Post a Comment
<< Home