A little less than 24 hours ago, the Mets went down 1-2-3 in the last inning of their season, unable to get the ball out of the infield. It was a fitting ending to a lame season.
Following an emotional 13-0 win over the Marlins on Saturday, the Mets and Tom Glavine choked away the division by allowing a 7-run first inning, stranding eight runners in the first three innings, and mailing it in the rest of the way. It was, in many ways, to be expected.
A couple of principles hold true. Baseball is the greatest sport the world has ever known. The Mets, despite the choke job, were alive until the last day of the season. They blew a 7 game lead in 15 games, were down a game, and then battled back to a tie. Until Luis Castillo finally struck out to end it yesterday, the Mets could have rallied back to win.
The Mets have a long offseason to think about things. Losing the division by one game, you realize that every game matters. A blown lead in April. A comeback fallen short in May. A decision to start Brian Lawrence in a meaningless June game is not so meaningless. An extra two weeks of rehab for Pedro looms large. A decision to steal third, or play a certain shift, or a failure to manage the bullpen properly which wore down Feliciano just enough to allow one dribbler.
Baseball is perfect. Its a 162 game battle, and in the end, the better team won. I love the Mets and despise the Phillies, but they won fair and square. At the end, when both teams were running on fumes, they had more left. Their 7-0 record against the Mets down the stretch was decisive. The Mets 1-6 record on their final homestand sealed the deal. I bear no lasting regret.
Momentum is only as good as the next day's starting pitcher. Some days you win, some days you lose, some days it rains. Nothing should have been taken for granted, but it was. The Mets deserved to lose, and the longer that it sinks in, the more I feel like this is the right thing. An exit here, at home, unceremoniously and depressing and real, on the last day of the season, is probably much more fitting for this edition of my team.
Things are never as good, or as bad as they seem. As Keith Hernandez said as the game wound down through its final outs, "It's only a game, slugger." It's a disappointing way for things to go, but when all is said and done this is a team that won 88 games. Despite losing what felt like every single close game (after Damion Easley was hurt) the Mets had a successful year.
Perceptions and expectations color your experiences. After last year, an 88-win season feels like a failure. Losing the division feels like a failure now, whereas a charge from behind falling short would have felt like an amazing triumph.
It's a long, long offseason. I hope the Mets, particularly the young Mets, learned some valuable lessons. Jose Reyes, David Wright, Lastings Milledge, John Maine, Oliver Perez, Aaron Heilman - I'm looking at you. Get home and lick those wounds. It's not as bad as it seems. Critics will pan this collapse as the worst in the history in baseball - and honestly, it probably is. Not only because of the lead, but because of the expectations.
But that's baseball. Next season, everyone will be 0-0, every game will begin 0-0, and 2007 will linger as a lesson delivered by the most devastating method possible. Its sad, but that, like everything else in life, serves to shape us and make us who we are. The collapse can define the team, or it can be the crucible through which this team had to pass before it could become World Champions. Time will tell.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
David Wright's 2006 Playoffs Houdini Impression
In October, I mentioned that the responsibility for the Mets untimely playoff failure fell on the shoulders of none other then David Wright. Not saying he's a choker, not saying he sucks, not saying I want him run out of town. He's a fantastic player. A leader. Good defensively. Willing to walk, dive, slide, and get on base by any means. Moves runners. Hits to the opposite field. Clutch.
However, this October, he stunk. I said so. People disagreed. Well, here's an article by Bob Klapisch which discusses Wright's performance in October. Draw your own conclusions:
However, this October, he stunk. I said so. People disagreed. Well, here's an article by Bob Klapisch which discusses Wright's performance in October. Draw your own conclusions:
Instead, they're counting on Wright to be the hitting machine who had 20
HRs and 74 RBIs in the first half of the 2006 season. An All-Star at the age of
23, Wright had the can't-miss credentials of someone preparing for a long,
uninterrupted run of stardom in New York.
But then came the All-Star break -- and, specifically, the Home Run Derby -- and Wright was evicted from Olympus. He hit just six HRs in his final 243 at-bats, and was uncharacteristically vulnerable in October, too, batting just .160 in the NL Championship Series against the Cardinals.In fact, while it appeared the Mets were doomed when they lost Pedro
Martinez and Orlando Hernandez in the postseason, it was Wright's untimely slump that sabotaged them.
What exactly went wrong? Scouts say Wright became vulnerable to
sliders down and away, chasing pitches out of the strike zone. There's a fine
line between an aggressive swing and one that's fueled by panic; Wright crossed
the line as October's pressure mounted. One bird dog who watched Wright during
the Cardinals series described him as "tight as a drum."Wright didn't disagree. "Next time, I'll know how to control my emotions better and
relax," Wright said. "Everything is under a microscope in the postseason, and it's easy to get carried away. I definitely got too excited."That's hardly a sin for a player who debuted at the age of 21 and became a bona fide star in just two summers. Sometimes it's hard to believe Wright is still so young; he
looks and acts like a veteran who understands the challenges of being a big city
superstar.
Monday, February 26, 2007
DON'T PANIC
Ben Shpigel over at the Times wrote a fantastic article on the Mets young arms, Mike Pelfrey and Phil Humber. He, quoting Rick Peterson, among others, talks about how it would be a bad decision for the Mets to expect 200 innings out of their young arms this season.
“If you’re a two-miler, you can’t run a marathon without gradually increasing your mileage,” the pitching coach Rick Peterson said. “It’s the same thing here.”
He's absolutely right. There are two times we need Pelfrey and Humber to be strong.... September and October of this year and in the future... for long careers. We don't need them in May of this season.
Mets: don't panic. Don't panic. Eyes on the prize. World Series only.
“If you’re a two-miler, you can’t run a marathon without gradually increasing your mileage,” the pitching coach Rick Peterson said. “It’s the same thing here.”
He's absolutely right. There are two times we need Pelfrey and Humber to be strong.... September and October of this year and in the future... for long careers. We don't need them in May of this season.
Mets: don't panic. Don't panic. Eyes on the prize. World Series only.
Saturday, February 17, 2007
The Fifth Starter
I can't stop thinking about baseball. Today, it was sub-freezing outside. Its February 13th. This tells me that its time to discuss the Mets starting rotation.
For all practical purposes, I will assume that the rotation will shake out like this.
1. Glavine
2. El Duque
3. Maine
4. Perez
5. Sele/Park/Pelfrey/Humber/Soler
Maine has a chance to be an above league average starter, and Perez, as we know, could be excellent (his 2004 version with an ERA sub 3.00 and more than a K per inning) or horrendous. The real interesting part of this exercise is to see what the Mets will do with the fifth spot.
Right now, the competition consists of two flavors of competitors:
Old, washed up, sucky guys versus young, unproven, unpolished guys.
In general, I always go with youth. I think that Pelfrey and Humber would both likely be better than Sele or Park would this season. HOWEVER... three reasons why we should resist plugging in Humber or Pelfrey right now.
1. They could use time in the minors to work on their stuff. Send them to New Orleans, tell them their jobs are not in danger. Tell them to a) limit their pitch counts and b) work on their secondary pitches. This is because:
2. Neither of these guys have 200 good innings in their arms this season. It has nothing to do with skill or age, but the simple mathematics and history show that you cannot increase a pitchers workload by more than 15% or so per season without a dropoff in ability. Pelfrey might be ok from innings 150-200, but he won't be as good as Pelfrey from innings 1-150. That is a guarantee. Put it in the books. Take a look at Justin Verlander or any other rookie from any season who followed that pattern.
3. Lastly, and most importantly, the Mets likely won't need them in the regular season. The Mets are built for the playoffs. Save the young arms for when it matters - October.
Hopefully, at the end of the year, the Mets rotation could get a boost from a few unexpected places - as a matter of fact, it could be an almost completely different rotation. Best case scenario, we could be looking at a pitching staff thats no longer mediocre, but verging on dominance.
1. Martinez
2. Glavine
3. Pelfrey
4. El Duque/Maine/Perez/Humber
Think about it. Priorities. Lets go Mets.
For all practical purposes, I will assume that the rotation will shake out like this.
1. Glavine
2. El Duque
3. Maine
4. Perez
5. Sele/Park/Pelfrey/Humber/Soler
Maine has a chance to be an above league average starter, and Perez, as we know, could be excellent (his 2004 version with an ERA sub 3.00 and more than a K per inning) or horrendous. The real interesting part of this exercise is to see what the Mets will do with the fifth spot.
Right now, the competition consists of two flavors of competitors:
Old, washed up, sucky guys versus young, unproven, unpolished guys.
In general, I always go with youth. I think that Pelfrey and Humber would both likely be better than Sele or Park would this season. HOWEVER... three reasons why we should resist plugging in Humber or Pelfrey right now.
1. They could use time in the minors to work on their stuff. Send them to New Orleans, tell them their jobs are not in danger. Tell them to a) limit their pitch counts and b) work on their secondary pitches. This is because:
2. Neither of these guys have 200 good innings in their arms this season. It has nothing to do with skill or age, but the simple mathematics and history show that you cannot increase a pitchers workload by more than 15% or so per season without a dropoff in ability. Pelfrey might be ok from innings 150-200, but he won't be as good as Pelfrey from innings 1-150. That is a guarantee. Put it in the books. Take a look at Justin Verlander or any other rookie from any season who followed that pattern.
3. Lastly, and most importantly, the Mets likely won't need them in the regular season. The Mets are built for the playoffs. Save the young arms for when it matters - October.
Hopefully, at the end of the year, the Mets rotation could get a boost from a few unexpected places - as a matter of fact, it could be an almost completely different rotation. Best case scenario, we could be looking at a pitching staff thats no longer mediocre, but verging on dominance.
1. Martinez
2. Glavine
3. Pelfrey
4. El Duque/Maine/Perez/Humber
Think about it. Priorities. Lets go Mets.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Mets Minor Moves - November 06
Just checking in with the Metsies to see whats happened since "the Catch" and Aaron Heilman's last floating change-up of the season.
Mets resigned Jose Valentin and El Duque yesterday, and made a trade today.
The Valentin signing (one year, $3.8M, with option) is not a terrible deal. As much as I hate Valentin, he hits right-handed pitching extremely well (to the tune of approximately .280/.330/.500 for his career) and can field decently. Its not too much money, considering the market, and worst case scenario, Valentin can play versus righties only. A platoon partner to face lefties looks like the best idea, although Minaya has hinted that he'll find an every day guy and relegate Valentin to a utility role.
THe El Duque signing is a little more troublesome. As good as he is when he pitches, he hasn't pitched all that much. Last season Duque put together a 9-7 record with a 4.09 ERA for the Mets. With all the offensive firepower, that's good enough. The contract, however (2 years, $12MM) is a little large OR long. One year at $6M would have been ok... or two years at a lesser rate. But what are the odds that Duque will both a) give us two seasons of pitching and b) have them be league average?
I don't hate the signing, but I don't love it. With age and injury concerns, we may end up with near to nothing for this. The part of the deal that I DO like is that it gives the Mets flexibility without financially handicapping them. $12M might be too much for El Duque, but allowing the Mets to negotiate from a position of strength, and retaining a Mets FA is better than acquiring a FA from another team because it does not require draft pick compensation.
Now the trade:
P Royce Ring and P Heath Bell to San Diego for OF Ben Johnson and P Jon Adkins
Small deal, but potentially revealing. Johnson is a 25 year old prospect - that's already bad. However, scouts like his tools, he had a great 2005, and he lost last year partially to injury. He has a chance to contribute full time. Adkins seems to be a league average or worse innings guy.
I'm sad to see Bell and Ring go- I actually think that if they see time in the majors, that they will both do well this season. I guess that's a prediction. They were two of the guys I rooted hardest for, but with the Mets bullpen depth, they were expendable. If Johnson works out, great, we win. If Johnson doesn't, we don't lose much. I'll be watching his progress closely.
Last thing - Lastings Milledge
This kis is for real. Only in New York would you have a prospect- with GREAT physical tools, who dominated the minor leagues in 2005 and 2006, at levels wayyyy too advanced for someone his age, not to mention bat .241 in the major leagues at the age of 21- get criticized. Everyone shut UP. Give him a chance to mature. He was better than fucking Michael Tucker and he couldn't legally drink until April.
Mets resigned Jose Valentin and El Duque yesterday, and made a trade today.
The Valentin signing (one year, $3.8M, with option) is not a terrible deal. As much as I hate Valentin, he hits right-handed pitching extremely well (to the tune of approximately .280/.330/.500 for his career) and can field decently. Its not too much money, considering the market, and worst case scenario, Valentin can play versus righties only. A platoon partner to face lefties looks like the best idea, although Minaya has hinted that he'll find an every day guy and relegate Valentin to a utility role.
THe El Duque signing is a little more troublesome. As good as he is when he pitches, he hasn't pitched all that much. Last season Duque put together a 9-7 record with a 4.09 ERA for the Mets. With all the offensive firepower, that's good enough. The contract, however (2 years, $12MM) is a little large OR long. One year at $6M would have been ok... or two years at a lesser rate. But what are the odds that Duque will both a) give us two seasons of pitching and b) have them be league average?
I don't hate the signing, but I don't love it. With age and injury concerns, we may end up with near to nothing for this. The part of the deal that I DO like is that it gives the Mets flexibility without financially handicapping them. $12M might be too much for El Duque, but allowing the Mets to negotiate from a position of strength, and retaining a Mets FA is better than acquiring a FA from another team because it does not require draft pick compensation.
Now the trade:
P Royce Ring and P Heath Bell to San Diego for OF Ben Johnson and P Jon Adkins
Small deal, but potentially revealing. Johnson is a 25 year old prospect - that's already bad. However, scouts like his tools, he had a great 2005, and he lost last year partially to injury. He has a chance to contribute full time. Adkins seems to be a league average or worse innings guy.
I'm sad to see Bell and Ring go- I actually think that if they see time in the majors, that they will both do well this season. I guess that's a prediction. They were two of the guys I rooted hardest for, but with the Mets bullpen depth, they were expendable. If Johnson works out, great, we win. If Johnson doesn't, we don't lose much. I'll be watching his progress closely.
Last thing - Lastings Milledge
This kis is for real. Only in New York would you have a prospect- with GREAT physical tools, who dominated the minor leagues in 2005 and 2006, at levels wayyyy too advanced for someone his age, not to mention bat .241 in the major leagues at the age of 21- get criticized. Everyone shut UP. Give him a chance to mature. He was better than fucking Michael Tucker and he couldn't legally drink until April.
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Moises Alou
I've long thought that Moises Alou was one of the most underrated players in the game. He's good. He rakes. The Mets are close to signing him for a 1 or 2 year deal for approximately $8M per. This is a bad idea.
Sign Alou, let Floyd go, and trade Milledge for pitching... seems to be the plan. This is why that's bad.
Alou is 40 years old. We already have a potent offense and a bad corner outfielder (Shawn Green) ... does this team need more offense? Does it need worse defense? Does it need to get older and remain more injury prone?
Alou played 96 games last year. He played 123 the year before. For his career, spanning 16 seasons, he's only played 1839 games out of a possible 2592. Not everyone is going to play every day, but this is 70%. That's not good.
Lastly, the comparison to Lastings Milledge. I love Milledge. He's REALLY GOOD. People dislike him because he's got an alleged attitude problem (which hasn't manifested at all) and the Mets are a likeable team in general with no villains. Gotta hate someone, don't you New York, you stupid assholes?
This is what Moises Alou was doing when he was Lastings' age and older:
20: No games
21: A, 117 AB, .214 batting average, 726 OPS
22: A, 358 AB, .313 batting average, 863 OPS
23: A/AA, 500+ AB, .300 batting average, 840 OPS
24: AAA, 271 AB, .273 batting average, 732 OPS
He made his MLB debut at the age of 24, and was a rookie at 25, when he hit a whopping 8 home runs.
Lets compare Lastings. At the age of 20, Lastings batted .337 at AA, which is BETTER than Alou was at the age of 23. This season, Lastings batted .277 at AAA, and posted an on base percentage of .388, which is outstanding.
Lastings also put up a line of .241/.310/.380 in the Majors this season, which was far below what he was projected to do, while playing good defense outside of two boneheaded plays. But he's only 21.
Michael Tucker, on the other hand, who made the postseason roster, put up a line of .196/.378/.321 and played horrible defense. No complaints there.
This is all I'm saying- Alou was a great hitter with a great career... but the Mets will be lucky to get a full season of him, and even so, he doesn't address any of our areas of weakness (other than left handed pitching, which is a deeper analysis). He's old, and likely to underachieve if he does play.
On the other hand there is Lastings, who is free, young, and likely to have a fantastic career. He might not hit 24 homers this year, but if the Mets let him go, its going to be a horrible mistake. Maybe they can deal Lastings for great pitching, but he's horrendously undervalued right now and to trade him now and replace him with a 40 year old who only plays 70% of the time would be an egregious error.
Sign Alou, let Floyd go, and trade Milledge for pitching... seems to be the plan. This is why that's bad.
Alou is 40 years old. We already have a potent offense and a bad corner outfielder (Shawn Green) ... does this team need more offense? Does it need worse defense? Does it need to get older and remain more injury prone?
Alou played 96 games last year. He played 123 the year before. For his career, spanning 16 seasons, he's only played 1839 games out of a possible 2592. Not everyone is going to play every day, but this is 70%. That's not good.
Lastly, the comparison to Lastings Milledge. I love Milledge. He's REALLY GOOD. People dislike him because he's got an alleged attitude problem (which hasn't manifested at all) and the Mets are a likeable team in general with no villains. Gotta hate someone, don't you New York, you stupid assholes?
This is what Moises Alou was doing when he was Lastings' age and older:
20: No games
21: A, 117 AB, .214 batting average, 726 OPS
22: A, 358 AB, .313 batting average, 863 OPS
23: A/AA, 500+ AB, .300 batting average, 840 OPS
24: AAA, 271 AB, .273 batting average, 732 OPS
He made his MLB debut at the age of 24, and was a rookie at 25, when he hit a whopping 8 home runs.
Lets compare Lastings. At the age of 20, Lastings batted .337 at AA, which is BETTER than Alou was at the age of 23. This season, Lastings batted .277 at AAA, and posted an on base percentage of .388, which is outstanding.
Lastings also put up a line of .241/.310/.380 in the Majors this season, which was far below what he was projected to do, while playing good defense outside of two boneheaded plays. But he's only 21.
Michael Tucker, on the other hand, who made the postseason roster, put up a line of .196/.378/.321 and played horrible defense. No complaints there.
This is all I'm saying- Alou was a great hitter with a great career... but the Mets will be lucky to get a full season of him, and even so, he doesn't address any of our areas of weakness (other than left handed pitching, which is a deeper analysis). He's old, and likely to underachieve if he does play.
On the other hand there is Lastings, who is free, young, and likely to have a fantastic career. He might not hit 24 homers this year, but if the Mets let him go, its going to be a horrible mistake. Maybe they can deal Lastings for great pitching, but he's horrendously undervalued right now and to trade him now and replace him with a 40 year old who only plays 70% of the time would be an egregious error.
Saturday, October 21, 2006
The Mets' Golden Boy
I've had another day to think about it.
As much as I hate Jose Valentin... and Billy Wagner did his best to blow every game he entered... Cliff Floyd had the heart of a warrior but contributed nothing... and Scott Spiezio/So Taguchi/Yadier Molina had no business to do what they did this series...
... the blame for the Mets loss rests squarely on the shoulders of one man.
Its probably best that it was him, because if it was someone else, the newspapers would be calling for his head.
No, its not Willie Randolph - he did a decent job.
It's David Wright.
Wright was invisible this series. There wasn't a single Met who contributed less than him. Even if there were, the Mets NEEDED Wright this series.
After we lost the second game despite two Delgado home runs, you knew he wasn't going to get pitched to anymore. We're still in the series at that point, 1-1 going to St. Louis. We're then tied 2-2.
After the Cardinals got burned by THREE homers each from Beltran and Delgado - with Delgado two RBI from the NLCS record after only three or four games - you know he's not going to sniff a good pitch. Or, more accurately, all the pitches to Delgado would be close enough to him for him to sniff. Credit the Cardinals - they read the book on Delgado... bust him in with fastballs, in off the plate, up high, high and tight. I'm shocked they let him do as much damage as they did by pitching him down and away.
The Cardinals adjusted. At this point, four games in, David Wright had done nothing and the Mets were still hanging in there. But then what? Beltran and Delgado get nothing ot hit. The Cards force Wright and Green to beat them. Missing Floyd was HUGE, because Wright pressed and there was no threat behind him. Shawn Green did a good job actually... he had a couple critical hits... but he's not going to beat you. He'll stroke a single once and a while, big deal. More often than not, he won't.
David Wright had a ton of chances to step it up, and he didn't. Delgado had THREE walks in the final game, and David only had one RBI - on a bloop single to score Beltran in the first inning. I don't hate the guy, I don't want to run him out of town - but lets not fool ourselves. If David Wright showed up to ONE of the four losses - JUST ONE - we win this series.
As much as I hate Jose Valentin... and Billy Wagner did his best to blow every game he entered... Cliff Floyd had the heart of a warrior but contributed nothing... and Scott Spiezio/So Taguchi/Yadier Molina had no business to do what they did this series...
... the blame for the Mets loss rests squarely on the shoulders of one man.
Its probably best that it was him, because if it was someone else, the newspapers would be calling for his head.
No, its not Willie Randolph - he did a decent job.
It's David Wright.
Wright was invisible this series. There wasn't a single Met who contributed less than him. Even if there were, the Mets NEEDED Wright this series.
After we lost the second game despite two Delgado home runs, you knew he wasn't going to get pitched to anymore. We're still in the series at that point, 1-1 going to St. Louis. We're then tied 2-2.
After the Cardinals got burned by THREE homers each from Beltran and Delgado - with Delgado two RBI from the NLCS record after only three or four games - you know he's not going to sniff a good pitch. Or, more accurately, all the pitches to Delgado would be close enough to him for him to sniff. Credit the Cardinals - they read the book on Delgado... bust him in with fastballs, in off the plate, up high, high and tight. I'm shocked they let him do as much damage as they did by pitching him down and away.
The Cardinals adjusted. At this point, four games in, David Wright had done nothing and the Mets were still hanging in there. But then what? Beltran and Delgado get nothing ot hit. The Cards force Wright and Green to beat them. Missing Floyd was HUGE, because Wright pressed and there was no threat behind him. Shawn Green did a good job actually... he had a couple critical hits... but he's not going to beat you. He'll stroke a single once and a while, big deal. More often than not, he won't.
David Wright had a ton of chances to step it up, and he didn't. Delgado had THREE walks in the final game, and David only had one RBI - on a bloop single to score Beltran in the first inning. I don't hate the guy, I don't want to run him out of town - but lets not fool ourselves. If David Wright showed up to ONE of the four losses - JUST ONE - we win this series.
Friday, October 20, 2006
The Mets ...
I'd like to get some thoughts out on this while everything is fresh.
Mets lost Game 7 of the NLCS last night to the Cardinals. It was a classic game. It was the kind of heart-breaking loss that only the Mets can deliver. Its the kind of first pitch to last pitch, no letting up, no rest, soul-rending, gut-wrenching classic that only the New York Mets can be a part of.
I'm going to have some lasting impressions from the game and from the series. Even losing in 7 won't be able to dim some of the positive memories that I'll take from this.
Game 1:
Tom Glavine pitches an absolute gem. In the absence of Pedro Martinez and Orlando Hernandez, Glavine pitched seven shutout innings, allowing only four hits. Glav was dominant. The only runs allowed in the game were a two-run home run by Carlos Beltran off of Jeff Weaver. He knocked the homer in the 6th, there was no scoring before or after. Mets win 2-0.
Game 2:
I'm in attendance at Shea to watch Maine take on Carpenter. The Mets score three in the first off a Carlos Delgado home run, and it looks like we're on our way. Carpenter, the reigning Cy Young, was supposed to be the only intimidating part of the Cardinals rotation. We reached him for three in the first and one in the second but John Maine coughed it right up.
The Mets added runs in the fifth and sixth, including another Delgado home run off Carpenter, but Willie Randolph singlehandedly blew this game. In the seventh inning, Guillermo Mota gave up a two-run triple to Scott Spiezio that landed in the rightfield corner. From my seats, it appeared that Shawn Green was going to catch the ball... but the replay showed that the ball carried to the fence and Green had to leap just to make a play. Nobody wants to second guess, but in the stadium, at the time, I was pissed.
It was my feeling that Willie made a big mistake. In the sixth, Pedro Feliciano came in for one batter, who he retired. Willie then pinch hit for Feliciano with... Anderson Hernandez. Why? No idea. Especially with Duncan, Edmonds AND Spiezio up next inning, I didn't think it was a good move. It ended up burning the Mets as Hernandez made an out and Mota allowed the two run triple in the next inning.
After the triple, the game was tied... but it felt so much worse. Three times we got the lead on Carpenter, three times we gave it up. We had opportunities but couldn't hold them. The Mets went quietly in the home seventh and eighth, and we in the stadium were silenced. The entry of Billy Wagner, after his NLDS antics, didn't help anything. And that was all she wrote for game two.
I'll summarize the other games later. I need to get back to work. Let me say this about Game Seven: I can't blame Beltran. There's a lot of talk about his last at-bat... but the Mets had so many other opportunities to do something. Jose Valentin was a fucking anchor all series. David Wright, though I love him, hit two balls hard in seven games... he wasn't even making hard outs.
Endy Chavez did as expected - although he was a liability at the plate, he was fantastic in the outfield. The play Chavez made to rob Rolen of a home run was instantly the best play in Mets history. Roger mentioned to me last night that the Chavez play might be the best defensive play ever made. I've had a whole night to think about it and I can't disagree.
Situation: 1-1 ballgame, game seven, and a no-doubt backbreaking two-run home run? Chavez saved the runs, saved the inning, saved the game, and saved the entire season. Not only was it a great play simply because of the magnitude of its importance, it was great play because, simply, it was one of the greatest physical feats I've ever seen. Line drive home run, Chavez sprints to the wall, he jumps, gets full extension, and snow cones the ball. I'm surprised his arm didn't snap off. Think about it. I would be hard pressed to think of a more important situation or of a better play.
Mets lost Game 7 of the NLCS last night to the Cardinals. It was a classic game. It was the kind of heart-breaking loss that only the Mets can deliver. Its the kind of first pitch to last pitch, no letting up, no rest, soul-rending, gut-wrenching classic that only the New York Mets can be a part of.
I'm going to have some lasting impressions from the game and from the series. Even losing in 7 won't be able to dim some of the positive memories that I'll take from this.
Game 1:
Tom Glavine pitches an absolute gem. In the absence of Pedro Martinez and Orlando Hernandez, Glavine pitched seven shutout innings, allowing only four hits. Glav was dominant. The only runs allowed in the game were a two-run home run by Carlos Beltran off of Jeff Weaver. He knocked the homer in the 6th, there was no scoring before or after. Mets win 2-0.
Game 2:
I'm in attendance at Shea to watch Maine take on Carpenter. The Mets score three in the first off a Carlos Delgado home run, and it looks like we're on our way. Carpenter, the reigning Cy Young, was supposed to be the only intimidating part of the Cardinals rotation. We reached him for three in the first and one in the second but John Maine coughed it right up.
The Mets added runs in the fifth and sixth, including another Delgado home run off Carpenter, but Willie Randolph singlehandedly blew this game. In the seventh inning, Guillermo Mota gave up a two-run triple to Scott Spiezio that landed in the rightfield corner. From my seats, it appeared that Shawn Green was going to catch the ball... but the replay showed that the ball carried to the fence and Green had to leap just to make a play. Nobody wants to second guess, but in the stadium, at the time, I was pissed.
It was my feeling that Willie made a big mistake. In the sixth, Pedro Feliciano came in for one batter, who he retired. Willie then pinch hit for Feliciano with... Anderson Hernandez. Why? No idea. Especially with Duncan, Edmonds AND Spiezio up next inning, I didn't think it was a good move. It ended up burning the Mets as Hernandez made an out and Mota allowed the two run triple in the next inning.
After the triple, the game was tied... but it felt so much worse. Three times we got the lead on Carpenter, three times we gave it up. We had opportunities but couldn't hold them. The Mets went quietly in the home seventh and eighth, and we in the stadium were silenced. The entry of Billy Wagner, after his NLDS antics, didn't help anything. And that was all she wrote for game two.
I'll summarize the other games later. I need to get back to work. Let me say this about Game Seven: I can't blame Beltran. There's a lot of talk about his last at-bat... but the Mets had so many other opportunities to do something. Jose Valentin was a fucking anchor all series. David Wright, though I love him, hit two balls hard in seven games... he wasn't even making hard outs.
Endy Chavez did as expected - although he was a liability at the plate, he was fantastic in the outfield. The play Chavez made to rob Rolen of a home run was instantly the best play in Mets history. Roger mentioned to me last night that the Chavez play might be the best defensive play ever made. I've had a whole night to think about it and I can't disagree.
Situation: 1-1 ballgame, game seven, and a no-doubt backbreaking two-run home run? Chavez saved the runs, saved the inning, saved the game, and saved the entire season. Not only was it a great play simply because of the magnitude of its importance, it was great play because, simply, it was one of the greatest physical feats I've ever seen. Line drive home run, Chavez sprints to the wall, he jumps, gets full extension, and snow cones the ball. I'm surprised his arm didn't snap off. Think about it. I would be hard pressed to think of a more important situation or of a better play.
Friday, January 27, 2006
Quick Note on Brian Bannister
And I agree that we’re getting ahead of ourselves with the prospect talk. I feel like Bannister, after posting this last season 2005 - AA - 109ip, 2.56 ERA, 1.08 WHIP, 7.79 K/92005 - AAA - 45ip, 3.18 ERA, 1.35 WHIP, 9.53 K/9 is being VERY underrated. I would consider him a notch above Maine at this point.
As for Humber, Soler, and Pelfrey… I wouldn’t count on any of them seeing time in the Majors this season, and probably only one of them (my money is on Pelfrey) making any impact in the Show.
Edit -- October 5, 2009
Bannister, as we all know, has gone on to a successful major league career for the Kansas City Royals. He is only 30-38 on his career, playing for a bad team, but has posted an ERA+ of 93, making him slightly above average for a starter for his career. He has done so all while earning slightly more than two million dollars over three seasons. Would have been a nice cheap player to have.
As for Humber, Soler, and Pelfrey... I was on the mark again, with Pelfrey making the Mets and having an excellent 2008. He had a poor 2009, so we'll see if he gets over the sophomore slump or not.
As for Humber, Soler, and Pelfrey… I wouldn’t count on any of them seeing time in the Majors this season, and probably only one of them (my money is on Pelfrey) making any impact in the Show.
Edit -- October 5, 2009
Bannister, as we all know, has gone on to a successful major league career for the Kansas City Royals. He is only 30-38 on his career, playing for a bad team, but has posted an ERA+ of 93, making him slightly above average for a starter for his career. He has done so all while earning slightly more than two million dollars over three seasons. Would have been a nice cheap player to have.
As for Humber, Soler, and Pelfrey... I was on the mark again, with Pelfrey making the Mets and having an excellent 2008. He had a poor 2009, so we'll see if he gets over the sophomore slump or not.
Who is Steve Schmoll?
"Steve Schmoll, the right-handed reliever the Mets acquired from the Dodgers on Wednesday, had pitched in 15 games for the Zulia Agullas team in Venezuela, striking out 20, walking four and surrendering 18 hits in 19 innings. His ERA was 2.84."
I knew the PCL was a very offensive league, but I had no idea how much. Of all the players with 25+ IP on the PCL team that Schmoll was on, only ONE had a better ERA then he did, and that was Osoria, who’s a good prospect too.
For reference, the four leaders in IP on that team had ERA’s of: 6.48, 5.35, 7.17, 7.12. No wonder Edwin Jackson’s head is all messed up.
Schmoll is a little old, but it looks like hge got a late start… he got crushed in college and went undrafted, but every year has done significantly better. Maybe he’s just learning to control that submariner delivery. Maybe he has a shot.
About Schmoll again… he seriously got shelled in college. Pretty bad for three years, until as a senior he put up a 3.49 ERA and 12.73 k/9. He then continued that success in Rookie Ball (23), A and then AA at the age of 24, and then last season at AAA and the Majors. His last season in the minors OUTSIDE of the PCL, he put up a 1.83 ERA and 8.24 K/9 in AA.
Then, even while in the PCL, he struck out 10.59 per nine innings and allowed only 0.34 homers per nine. Those are pretty nice numbers for that league. For the moment, I can be a little less upset about the Seo trade.
Edit -- October 5, 2009
Steve Schmoll posted a 4.69 ERA in AAA for the Mets in 2006. He followed that up with an excellent 3.76 ERA and 1.35 WHIP in 2007 for the same squad, New Orleans. Not star-caliber stats, but certainly useful. He posted a 47-18 K-BB ratio, and the high WHIP isn't as much of a problem for a guy who induces ground balls.
The Mets subsequently released/traded/non-tendered him, as he pitched this year for Washington's AA team. He posted a 3.07 ERA, again, only decent for someone his age (28) but way down in Double-A. I think he deserves a shot, but it doesn't look like he'll get one.
I knew the PCL was a very offensive league, but I had no idea how much. Of all the players with 25+ IP on the PCL team that Schmoll was on, only ONE had a better ERA then he did, and that was Osoria, who’s a good prospect too.
For reference, the four leaders in IP on that team had ERA’s of: 6.48, 5.35, 7.17, 7.12. No wonder Edwin Jackson’s head is all messed up.
Schmoll is a little old, but it looks like hge got a late start… he got crushed in college and went undrafted, but every year has done significantly better. Maybe he’s just learning to control that submariner delivery. Maybe he has a shot.
About Schmoll again… he seriously got shelled in college. Pretty bad for three years, until as a senior he put up a 3.49 ERA and 12.73 k/9. He then continued that success in Rookie Ball (23), A and then AA at the age of 24, and then last season at AAA and the Majors. His last season in the minors OUTSIDE of the PCL, he put up a 1.83 ERA and 8.24 K/9 in AA.
Then, even while in the PCL, he struck out 10.59 per nine innings and allowed only 0.34 homers per nine. Those are pretty nice numbers for that league. For the moment, I can be a little less upset about the Seo trade.
Edit -- October 5, 2009
Steve Schmoll posted a 4.69 ERA in AAA for the Mets in 2006. He followed that up with an excellent 3.76 ERA and 1.35 WHIP in 2007 for the same squad, New Orleans. Not star-caliber stats, but certainly useful. He posted a 47-18 K-BB ratio, and the high WHIP isn't as much of a problem for a guy who induces ground balls.
The Mets subsequently released/traded/non-tendered him, as he pitched this year for Washington's AA team. He posted a 3.07 ERA, again, only decent for someone his age (28) but way down in Double-A. I think he deserves a shot, but it doesn't look like he'll get one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)