Mets Play Pretty One Day
The great irony of baseball is that things are seldom what they seem. Sometimes things work out exactly as we expect; a game plan fastidiously crafted with meticulous attention to detail and ultimately executed to perfection by the guys in uniform. Rarely is such an ideal outcome realized; so many factors can intervene and cause even the greatest plan to go completely awry. The Mets' season to date is certainly an immediate example of the fickleness of the baseball fates (if you believe in that sort of thing; it's just the vicissitudes of the game to everyone else).
Three months ago the Mets looked as if they had a pretty good plan for this thing. Not a great plan, but a pretty good one. There were some problems: an unproven commodity in left field, a questionable back end of the rotation, insufficient depth at virtually every position. In spite of those question marks, the formula was pretty straight-forward:
- Get great pitching from their ace
- Get decent pitching from everyone else
- Get terrific production at third base, shortstop and centerfield
- Get average production at first base and at catcher
- Take what you can get in left field, right field and at second base
- When you get a lead, use your fortified bullpen to keep that lead
This plan wasn't expected to win 108 games or even 100, but it could have been good enough to win 95. Two months into the season -- a third of the games having been played -- and 95 wins looks like a fantasy. Innumerable injuries have exposed the aforementioned lack of depth, forcing the Mets to rely on retreads and career minor leaguers to fill in the gaps on their active roster that have been left by so many defections to the disabled list. The team's collective health problems have been exacerbated by a stubborn and frustratingly antiquated managerial philosophy which has often left the Mets' in a hole too deep for even a healthy club to pull itself from. Add to all of this a shoddy grasp of baseball fundamentals -- "fundies" -- and deleteriously aggressive baserunning that has seen more runners thrown out at second, third and home than I can ever recall seeing before, and it's no wonder the Mets are where they are.
We can accept that injuries happen; they happen in life and they happen in baseball and all you can do is prepare yourself for their inevitability by having reasonable contingency plans in place. Well, the injuries happened and the contingency plans, as it turns out, were not terribly reasonable at all. The backup plan for Carlos Delgado was: Fernando Tatis? The backup plan for Jose Reyes was: Alex Cora? And for Cora: Ramon Martinez? Or Will "The Spill" Valdez?
The terrifying part of it all is that things could be much, much worse. None of the Mets' three best players has been hurt (four if you count Francisco Rodriguez). What happens if David Wright gets hurt: Tatis again? Mike Lamb? Or if Carlos Beltran were lost for a stretch: Jeremy Reed? Cory Sullivan? This -- not Luis Castillo dropping an easy pop-up -- is what should keep you up at night. If not you, certainly Omar Minaya. No? He's sleeping fine? That makes sense.
Despite all of this, the Mets are still just four games back of the Phillies in the NL East, which perhaps says more about the Phillies -- and the rest of the division, and possibly the National League -- than it does about the Mets. Whatever blame we wish to assign to the Mets' training staff, there's little that can be done in the injury department that could affect the immediate future in any meaningful way. For the most part injuries are out of the Mets' control now. The other things -- the careless baserunning, slipshod defense and pernicious managerial decision-making -- are all well within the Mets' grasp. Unfortunately, Jerry Manuel isn't going to wake up tomorrow and suddenly be open-minded about all relevant pieces of data -- objective and subjective -- that could help him do his job better. So all the Mets can really do is pull their shit together and start playing like big leaguers.
Look, people make mistakes, ballplayers make mistakes. But what the Mets have been doing for the better part of two months goes beyond the occasional bad throw or baserunning snafu. Theirs are systemic, fundamental baseball problems that have occurred far too often to be merely unfortunate happenstance. I don't know if it's laziness or apathy or something else, but it's embarrassing for both the team and its fans. Carlos Beltran is right: the Mets should have beaten the Pirates. They also should have won the series against the Phillies and the Yankees. The talent was there but the execution was lacking. As a matter of necessity, the Mets have had to deviate from the pre-season plan. They've had to plug holes with little more than Mighty Putty. Lazy, uninspired play was never part of the plan, and quite frankly I think we're all sick of watching it.
I can accept losing, but there's no excuse for losing like this. Be better.
35 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good Analysis
But I take issue with this
Three months ago the Mets looked as if they had a pretty good plan for this thing. Not a great plan, but a pretty good one. There were some problems: an unproven commodity in left field, a questionable back end of the rotation, insufficient depth at virtually every position.
This wasn’t a pretty good plan. You did a great job of highlighting exactly why this wasn’t a good plan. It should be defended as being a good plan. It was a risky plan, predicated on the notion that everything that was good last year would remain good, some of the bad things would correct themselves (Maine, Castillo, Perez) and only one glaring thing (the bullpen) need to be corrected.
This was a bad plan. If everything had worked out positively it could have produced a 95 win season. But it was totally unrealistic to believe that all these thing would work out well, and that things that were good last year would automatically remain the same. In my mind this was an 85 win plan that could produce anywhere from 79 wins to 91 wins.
It's relative
Compared to the Pirates’ plan or the Marlins’ plan it was a pretty good one. There were problems, as I’ve mentioned, but even an 88-90 win season was a reasonable expectation, which to me is “pretty good”. Not great, not terrific certainly, but pretty good.
It is relative
But in that regard I think the Pirates and Marlins have better plans. Their organizational goals are completely different from the Mets. Their goal is keep payroll costs down and they field a team which reflects that goal.
The Mets goal this year was to win the division and contend for a world series. The team they fielded going into the season didn’t reflect that goal. They took five of the best players in the game (four of whom were already on the team) surrounded them with questions marks, and backed them up with crap. Then they crossed their fingers and hoped that the great players would continue to be great, the question marks would be adequate to good, and the crap would be usable. To me that sounds like a plan designed for a mid-market team that thinks they might contend, but is content with a .500 season, and not a team with a new stadium and the financial resources of the Mets.
As far as the results so far, the Mets are about where I expected them to be. I had them as an 85 win team this year, but in contention due to the weakness of the division and the league.
Pirates and Marlins
I’m saying I want the Mets to take the approach of those teams. The teams they field just reflect the philosophy of the organizations better.
I keep hearing this crap
Cora not a reasonable backup for Jose, etc etc etc. What do you WANT out of a backup player, for Christ’s sake? They’re backup players FOR A REASON. If the hit better, they would be starters.
Cora is a perfectly reasonable backup. Tatis is a perfectly reasonable backup. What happens is: if you lose a key member of your lineup for a long period of time, you have to go out and find a replacement. That’s how it works.
I don't think it's unreasonable
to expect that a team with the Mets’ resources could find someone better than Ramon Martinez or Wilson Valdez. Backups are backups for a reason, it’s true, but the “haves” should be able to do better than this. This I expect from the dregs of the league, not a team with the Mets’ wherewithal.
But the backup for Jose wasn't Martinez
It was Cora. We got screwed because our backup got hurt. We had to replace Jose with a Triple A shortstop and those basically are the Valdez’s and Martinez’s of the world.
by Lunkwill Fook on Jun 15, 2009 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
First base
The Mets haven’t had reasonable contingencies for Delgado, an aging, old-player skills first baseman, at any point during his Mets career. I can excuse not having a solid backup for Reyes, but not for Delgado.
by sjohnson125 on Jun 15, 2009 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Mike Carp
never mind.
Since the Royals apparently have no use for him, a reasonable back-up plan for Delgado may have been prying someone like Kila Ka’aihue waway from them. Maybe they thought having Nick Evans down in Buffalo working on hitting righties wasa reasonable plan.
Church actually regressing and Murphy being plain awful may not have seemed all that likely. Although both were possible fails.
Murphy, actually, has a decent bb/k rate. He just hasn’t stung the ball much at all it seems. Went from great babip to awful. Some regression should have been expected.
In any event, i am glad that the plain old mets haven’t played fundamental baseball and been a little lackadaisacal at times is being acknowledged here. Aside from all the other organizational mistakes, bad gm’ing, managing, bad players, this was out there, and the feeling here seemed to be to come up with every excuse not to acknowledge it, because that would give too much credit to the WFAN and NY Post and Mets Blog denizens.
Cora isn't a reasonable back up because
he was signed in case Castillo died, not to fill in long-term for Jose. He was brought in pretty much specifically as insurance for a position we had absolutely no idea what to expect from Castillo. A player who was brought in pretty specifically as insurance for a huge question mark shouldn’t also be counted on as the only viable option for another position.
Cora was signed to backup either Castillo or Jose. Castillo was in line to play 2nd base every day. I don’t buy that rationale.
by Lunkwill Fook on Jun 15, 2009 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm with you on this
sure, I’ll agree that the Mets probably thought Cora was going to get a lot more time at second then at short, mostly b/c Reyes averages like 158 games a season, but he was brought in as the middle infield backup. Most teams only have one of those, and if you expected us to have more, then forget about having a backup for Delgado.
Gina, would you be complaining about the lack of an adequate backup for Wright if it was him that got hurt instead of Reyes? The fact is this isn’t the deadball era – you can’t carry a backup for every single position anymore. Cora was a reasonably versatile middle infield backup who unfortunately also got hurt immediately after taking over for our young and previously consistently uninjured short stop.
Reyes
used to have leg injury issues, although that was pretty much in the past. Just tossing that out.
Cora’s been pretty good when healthy this year, but I wouldn’t have thought him a great option to back up either player prior to this year. But yeah, a back-up for a 26 year old star, not many tems have a great one lurking. The rays being a team that when bartlet and Burrell go down have Zobrist and Brignac. Not every team has that depth.
Tejada, if he were a little older, but coming into this year you couldn’t count on him at all. havens hadn’t advanced enough either. By next year the Mets prospects will have come along enough forr them to be the backup plan. davis for first maybe (platoon back up with Evans-is delagado signed for next year), havens, tejada, thole…
yea
I meant basically since 2005 Reyes has been completely healthy. I just find it funny b/c people complain about not having adequate backups for guys that you really can’t plan to lose, but I guarantee there would have been some howling if Omar had thrown a few million at a backup shortstop in addition to Cora. The problem, which you sorta alluded to, is that we don’t have high level prospects ready to go. All of our good prospects are too far away from the big leagues. I don’t really blame Omar for that, b/c I think overall he’s done a fantastic job stocking our farm clubs with young talent, especially when you consider that he doesn’t go over slot (and I think that blame lies on the Wilpons, not Omar).
Omar has MANY faults, but not having a good 3rd string backup shortstop really isn’t one of them, no matter how hard we want to blame him for everything.
And Zobrist and Bartlett have completely come out of nowhere. Prior to this season, you probably would have put them on the same level as Cora. (Although Zobrist started showing some power last year). I’d call it more lucky than anything else.
by Lunkwill Fook on Jun 15, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I liked Zobrist a lot
But yeah, Bartlett is a shocker. And Zobrist being THIS good is a little surprising too. I think he is just good, now. he was good second half. The only issue with him coming into thisseason was playing time. They kinda buried him in the world series and playoffs last year.
focus on process, not results
that was the take-home from a Malcolm Gladwell piece on virtuosity or something
The loss from Castillo’s drop was a good process, but an unlucky result. 199 out of 200 times a infield pop gets caught.
The season as a whole has been a fair process yielding fair results. If you play unproven or elderly players out of position and bunt a lot, you’re going to lose a lot of games. If you don’t have decent insurance policies for your front tier, you’re going to lose some games. If you give Oliver Perez money to play baseball, you’re just a loser.
Thank God
I was out of the country from Thursday through Sunday.
I agree with Eric’s post in its entirety — and in addition, it’s a joke that a team with a $150 million payroll:
(1) So heavily leverages that money on the bullpen, ostensibly because Mama’s of Corona so ordered.
(2) Is spending $6 million on — at best — replacement level second base, $6 million on below average catcher, has Tim Redding and Livan Hernandez each pitching every five days, and has no power to speak of out of corner OF and our backup plan/“1B of the future” Daniel Murphy. On the rotation, there were several solid options, and Omar doled out the big bucks to the most fragile of them — and then simply chose to accumulate spare parts. We’re INCREDIBLY lucky that Livan’s gotten lucky.
(3) That Minaya eschewed signing any offense — aside from Sheff on the ultra-cheap — is pathetic. Handing Murphy a corner OF spot was a terrible miscalculation. More terrible than many of us foresaw, but his presence should not have foreclosed signing a power hitting LF.
This kind of management is laughable — I didn’t even mention Jerry, who, I imagine, sleeps with a copy of Jay Bell’s Greatest Sac Bunts under his pillow.
out of the country
You are the luckiest S.O.B. in all of Met fandom – I literally was wishing to myself that I had been you at various points after the Castillo affair.
by metsjetsnets on Jun 15, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
There's a hollowness to this team thats disturbing
They’ve cost themselves multiple hard earned wins already with said laziness. They’re like a cocktease. They seem to accomplish so much, and then it just gets shattered, and you’re left lonely and cold with nothing but a box of tissues and a mess on your hands (pun intended). Every time they get you excited, they do the most sobering thing you could imagine a team doing, whether its miss a base, neglect a slide, or try fail to catch a baseball with one hand.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jun 15, 2009 10:53 AM EDT reply actions
Phillies
Do have the second best record in the league, and the third best record in MLB, so it says that the leagues are more balanced than we think they should be?
by EastFallowfield on Jun 15, 2009 11:12 AM EDT reply actions
How many more wins should we have right now?
I can figure in at least three from the last week. The Phillies series should have been a sweep and there’s no excuse for Castillo dropping that ball.
This team has had a major hole at second base for years. Minaya has failed to address that. We also have a starting staff that put together with gum and popsible sticks. I don’t think anyone fears the prospect of facing Hernandez or Redding in a seven game series.
Pelfrey looks like he’s plateued. That guy has the stuff to be a future ace and he his beginning to bottom out a bit. Although his last start was completely screwed up by Manuel keeping him in way too long.
But we should in all respects be up three more games despite these injuries. As I see it it’s a mix of poor fundies and bad management.
I doubt pelfrey has plateaued
Hell, he could learn a cutter or a split and be like Mike Scott for a while, but as it is, while he has regressed a bit this year thus far from his hot streak last year after may, he seems like he is becoming more and more a pitcher. he is young enough and it takes some guys time.
I like Pelf a lot
but I just wish he could strike more guys out. But even if not, he could be a valuable #3 or 4 starter for years if he pitches like he’s been pitching for the past year. Unfortunately, we have him as our #2 right now.
This highlights the problem
I like Pelf and I think he can get better. But going into the season expecting him to be a #2 was expecting too much based on a small body of success. If he had been slotted as a #3 or 4 (not behind Ollie and Maine, but behind a legit #2) I would have felt good about the rotation. But assuming he was going to be as good or better then he was last year, and he was ready to be a legit #2, wasn’t a risk a team with these resources should be taking.
That seems to pretty much sum up everything wrong with this team
Considering the resources we shouldn’t be depending on as many question marks and risks.
Pelfrey is one of my favorite players on the team
believe it or not.
I think for the most part that Manuel is mishandeling him. His last start he should have been taken out after the fifth. He had a quality start after getting knocked around his last two. I think you have to build a young player back up a bit after they have a few poor outings. Also, he was pretty gassed after the fifth and I think everyone in the park knew he was done for the day. Even Pelfrey looked like he knew that was it for him in the dug out.
Had Manuel just limited him to five I think his psyche would be better heading into his next start. The Mets also would have won that second game against Philly as the Pen wouldn’t have had a bases loaded situation to clean up.
I hope the Mets bring back Valentine. I don’t have a lot of faith in Manuel to bring Pelfrey to the next level. Pelf has the stuff to saw off bats and I agree needs to develop more of an arsenal of pitches. Confidence is also a big thing with a guy at his stage of development.
by Chickendirt on Jun 15, 2009 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
i was fine
with him coming out for the 6th. he struggled a bit, but got utley to ground out. The 7th was a bridge too far.
95 wins looks like a fantasy?
They’re on pace for 85-86 wins right now. Assuming a little hot streak once everyone is healthier, does 90-92 wins seem that far out of reach?





























