Master Index of Archived Threads


Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point Aug 05 2015 08:59 AM

Anyone else feeling a bit giddy these days?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 05 2015 09:16 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

It was clear there was pent-up strain of pennant fever just waiting to infect this club and its fans. I won;t be irrationally exuberant until we put Washington down by 4 games.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 05 2015 09:25 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Actually, that would me more rationally exuberant.

Centerfield Aug 05 2015 09:27 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I am fucking giddy. I think it is because for the first time (much more than the 11 game winning streak) I feel like we have enough talent on this team to be a legitimate contender.

Edgy MD Aug 05 2015 09:33 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Legitimate contender? They're in first place, mofo! On August 5th!! The team to beat just got beaten three times straight and our team did the beating. They're beyond having the talent to be a legit contender. They're the team the legit contenders are chasing. They're who everyone else wishes they were. (Is that irrational?)

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 05 2015 09:34 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

You know what pumps me up, Anthony diComo's emoji calendar:

Vic Sage Aug 05 2015 09:49 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: Anyone else feeling a bit giddy these days? yes, but that's just a side effect of my medication.

dgwphotography Aug 05 2015 11:31 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: Anyone else feeling a bit giddy these days? It's the fact that the front office shows that they are going for it this year. Whether they win it or not is actually immaterial to me. The front office has shown they are invested, so I am.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 05 2015 12:53 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I wouldn't say I'm irrationally excited. What I would say is that, after almost a decade of donning the Sunday best and trudging off to service more or less out of compulsive obligation, I find myself wholly stirred by the spirit. As opposed to showing up because it's what we do, and hoping against the worst, well... I'm enjoying mass these days. I've even got myself a new church hat.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 05 2015 01:07 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

IMO this is a much more enjoyable good team than the last good team we had (06-08) inasmuch as it's a little more organically and thoughtfully created, and succeeding against expectations as opposed to a club with a bunch of key guys we got only because we paid the highest price, more or less (often less) doing what was expected.

themetfairy Aug 05 2015 01:13 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I'm not ready to be giddy just yet. But I'm enjoying how the season is playing out so far.

Edgy MD Aug 05 2015 01:25 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I was pretty calm and restrained, until we got Eric O'Flaherty. We're unstoppable now!

d'Kong76 Aug 05 2015 01:31 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

My scales these days are heavy on the irrational side, but that's for a thread in the NBF. I'll get some more exuberance for the Mets if they can put some more distance between them- selves and the Nationals. I think LWFS should post a picture of him in his Sunday chapeau.

Lefty Specialist Aug 05 2015 01:34 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

G-Fafif Aug 05 2015 01:43 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Giddy, but like on seven-second delay as if it's taking me a few extra beats to comprehend what's been happening since last week. My supergiddiness was in April, which was in real time. Being beaten back a bit by the circumstances that ensued once the streaking was over has made me a touch wary of so much happiness all at once. But I'm getting there. Boy, am I getting there.

Centerfield Aug 07 2015 09:28 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

1.5 games away from rational exuberance.

G-Fafif Aug 07 2015 10:34 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Normally cautious sort I know calculated magic number to clinch division, scolded himself for even doing the math. But it's 52.

dgwphotography Aug 08 2015 06:35 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

G-Fafif wrote: Normally cautious sort I know calculated magic number to clinch division, scolded himself for even doing the math. But it's 52. **turns head** ptooey ptooey

Ashie62 Aug 08 2015 11:17 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Winning is more fun than losing.

d'Kong76 Aug 08 2015 11:35 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Expect the Mets!

RealityChuck Aug 08 2015 01:42 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I think the Wilmer Flores game on the 31st could be the Black Cat game of 2015. (For the youngsters)

Zvon Aug 08 2015 03:17 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Since last nights win, which we would have lost 3-0 with maybe 3 dinky hits in June & July, I'm allowing the giddiness to rule my body.

Ashie62 Aug 08 2015 03:53 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Then you look like John Malkovich.

Zvon Aug 08 2015 04:19 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Thank you.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 09 2015 03:04 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Feeling less giddy since the Mets' bats went cold and they couldn't win the series against Tampa Bay. On the bright side the Nationals lost again. And as an added bonus, Toronto swept the Yankees.

d'Kong76 Aug 09 2015 04:25 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

4-2 on short road-trip, even though both lost games were very winnable... and they're still in first place, on August 9th... I think we all would have signed up for that in spring training. That's about as exuberant I've been in awhile.

themetfairy Aug 09 2015 04:50 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

G-Fafif wrote: Normally cautious sort I know calculated magic number to clinch division, scolded himself for even doing the math. But it's 52. 51 now?

dgwphotography Aug 09 2015 05:48 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

dgwphotography wrote: G-Fafif wrote: Normally cautious sort I know calculated magic number to clinch division, scolded himself for even doing the math. But it's 52. **turns head** ptooey ptooey This is all your fault. Even my, admittedly non-Jewish, spitting couldn't save us from the hex you bestowed upon us.

Lefty Specialist Aug 10 2015 06:27 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Just win, and what they do won't matter.

HahnSolo Aug 10 2015 07:02 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I liken my exuberance to that of a long road trip to someplace cool, and you finally start to see road signs for your destination. Content to know we're close to where we want to be, excited for the possibilities, but subdued because I know there's a chance we'll hit traffic before we get there.

Centerfield Aug 10 2015 07:37 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I find I'm so excited that I can barely sit still or hold a thought in my head. I think it's the excitement only a contender can feel. A contender at a start of a stretch run whose conclusion is uncertain. I hope our young pitching can hold up down the stretch. I hope we hit enough and catch the ball. I hope the post-season is as glorious as it has been in my dreams. I hope.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 10 2015 07:43 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

HahnSolo wrote: I liken my exuberance to that of a long road trip to someplace cool, and you finally start to see road signs for your destination. Content to know we're close to where we want to be, excited for the possibilities, but subdued because I know there's a chance we'll hit traffic before we get there. Well-worded!

Ceetar Aug 10 2015 08:44 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Washington has had their horses back for a while now and they still are 3-7 L10. The Mets have what they need to win this division, and that's what's got me exuberant and saving pennies for a postseason game.

TransMonk Aug 10 2015 09:57 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Ceetar wrote: Washington has had their horses back for a while now and they still are 3-7 L10. The Mets have what they need to win this division, and that's what's got me exuberant and saving pennies for a postseason game. While I mostly agree, my main concern is the tiring of the young arms down the stretch. Not just the innings cap that may be impending for some of them, but a worry that their effectiveness may diminish over the next 50-some games. What happened to the six-man rotation? Are they really waiting for Matz to return before re-instating it? I'm not sure that is going to cut it. I would hate to get to the last two weeks of the season and watch the team go down in flames because the young guns are laboring.

Lefty Specialist Aug 10 2015 10:53 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: I find I'm so excited that I can barely sit still or hold a thought in my head. I think it's the excitement only a contender can feel. A contender at a start of a stretch run whose conclusion is uncertain. I hope our young pitching can hold up down the stretch. I hope we hit enough and catch the ball. I hope the post-season is as glorious as it has been in my dreams. I hope. It's a feeling we're allowed to get occasionally. 1988. 1999. 2000. 2006. 1986 was a foregone conclusion by now. But we've also had this feeling in 1998, 2001, 2007 and 2008 and it didn't turn out well. So while I'm enjoying the fun of being relevant for the first time in 7 years, I'm also bracing for the possibility of the sharp smack across the chin. I'm a Mets fan. It's what I do.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 10 2015 02:17 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

If the Mets don't win the pennant this year, we will officially be in the longest stretch in franchise history without a World Series appearance. Not as bad as the Cubs, though.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 10 2015 02:25 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

We're already there. The Mets have already gone 14 years without appearing in a World Series. (2001 through 2014). The previous high was 13. (1987 through 1999) Before that it was 12 years. (1974 through 1985). If this pattern holds, the Mets will win the pennant in 2015 but that will be followed by a 15-year drought, ending with a pennant in 2031.

seawolf17 Aug 10 2015 02:37 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: We're already there. The Mets have already gone 14 years without appearing in a World Series. (2001 through 2014). The previous high was 13. (1987 through 1999) Before that it was 12 years. (1974 through 1985). If this pattern holds, the Mets will win the pennant in 2015 but that will be followed by a 15-year drought, ending with a pennant in 2031. I'm so starved for anything, I'd almost sign up for that. Almost.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 10 2015 02:40 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: We're already there. The Mets have already gone 14 years without appearing in a World Series. (2001 through 2014). The previous high was 13. (1987 through 1999) Before that it was 12 years. (1974 through 1985). If this pattern holds, the Mets will win the pennant in 2015 but that will be followed by a 15-year drought, ending with a pennant in 2031. Right you are. Sloppy me. I simply counted the years, but not the months or weeks or days.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 10 2015 03:00 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: We're already there. The Mets have already gone 14 years without appearing in a World Series. (2001 through 2014). The previous high was 13. (1987 through 1999) Before that it was 12 years. (1974 through 1985). If this pattern holds, the Mets will win the pennant in 2015 but that will be followed by a 15-year drought, ending with a pennant in 2031. But the Mets win the World Series on alternate pennants, so this would be the year to win it all.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 12 2015 05:35 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets 2.5 games up with deGrom pitching tonight! Nats facing Kershaw tonight! Also, the Blue Jays are only a half-game away from making the Mets the only 1st place team in New York! Giddy!

Centerfield Aug 12 2015 07:28 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Quadruple Happiness last night.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 12 2015 07:36 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I don't think the exuberance is at all irrational. It's August 12, the Mets are 2.5 games in first place and have a soft schedule ahead. Baseball Prospectus, as of this morning, has the Mets at 69.5% to win the division, 73.2% to make the playoffs, and 6.9% to win the World Series. Traditionally, this has been the time of year when I start paying less attention to the Mets, but instead, this year I'm spending more time watching. And while the 2.5 game lead is very nice, I won't feel completely comfortable until they have a 7-game lead with only 17 to play. (Ummm, never mind on that last thought.) It looks like we'll have meaningful games in September. And while that phrase was much derided (mainly, I think, because it came from a Wilpon) it's really what we want, isn't it?

MFS62 Aug 12 2015 07:48 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Yes, but I'd like some meaningful games in October, too. Later

Benjamin Grimm Aug 12 2015 07:52 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Of course. But first things first.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 12 2015 07:55 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets are guaranteed to play at least 4 games in October!

Benjamin Grimm Aug 12 2015 07:59 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: Mets are guaranteed to play at least 4 games in October! Hopefully those four will be meaningless, followed by 15 to 20 meaningful games.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 12 2015 11:17 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

They can mean something, like jockeying for best record in NL or testing out some bench players in starting roles so they won't be rusty.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 12 2015 11:37 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Okay, I'll allow that!

d'Kong76 Aug 12 2015 11:42 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Already 11 wins or so behind St. Lou, best record in NL would be a phenomenal achievement.

Lefty Specialist Aug 12 2015 12:01 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Just drive for the division. It's just one team to beat and they're already ahead of them. Mets would be 3 games out of the second WC currently, 4 in the loss column. And the team they'd be chasing has already gone 7-0 against them this year. So the path is pretty clear. Plus, there's none of that 'one and done' crap to worry about, where anything can happen. The Mets pitching staff is a huge strength in a 7-game series. Just keep swimming.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 12 2015 12:09 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Yes, I want that division title. (And I'd almost rather get the second wild card than the first, because the system, I think, is very unfair to the first wild card team. A team that gets the second slot is playing with house money.) Anyway, the most likely scenario, it seems, has the Cardinals playing the wild card winner (Pirates or Cubs) and the Mets (or Nationals) playing the NL West winner. I can definitely see the Mets playing the Dodgers in the first round and then the Cardinals in the second round, which sounds ominously like 2006, but hopefully with a happier, or at least later, ending.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 12 2015 01:35 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

d'Kong76 wrote: Already 11 wins or so behind St. Lou, best record in NL would be a phenomenal achievement. Maybe second best. Maybe just making Washington miserable.

dgwphotography Aug 12 2015 01:40 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

At the conclusion of games on August 11: The 1969 Mets were 62-49, and 8 games back. The 2015 Mets are 61-52 and 2.5 games ahead. Just sayin'

Lefty Specialist Aug 12 2015 02:15 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Cubs, collapse notwithstanding, were a pretty good team in 1969. Nats, not so much.

Centerfield Aug 13 2015 06:47 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Now 3.5 games up! Second straight night of Quadruple Happiness! 1/2 a game away from Rational Exuberance!

Mets – Willets Point Aug 13 2015 07:18 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

And the Mets are the only New York City baseball team in first place today! Not! Enough! Exclamation! Points! !!!!!

Edgy MD Aug 13 2015 07:33 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I feel like I had a wonderful date with Cleveland last night, and I should send them flowers to them and call them from work.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 13 2015 07:51 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets are once again 10 games over .500, for the first time since April. I hereby challenge them to push it to 20 games. That would require them going 29-19 the rest of the way, and they'd finish with 91 wins. [list][/list:u]

d'Kong76 Aug 13 2015 01:09 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I declare, fuck it; my name is d'Kong and I AM EXUBERANT!

Ceetar Aug 13 2015 01:12 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Let me paint you a picture.. Road trip to loser teams in hitters park followed by what should be a fun, crazy, completely sold out weekend at home against the Red Sox in which there's a fair shot DAVID WRIGHT MAY BE PLAYING.

Zvon Aug 13 2015 01:16 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

A scene from Being Warren Zvon

Benjamin Grimm Aug 13 2015 01:19 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I like how the graph I posted above has automatically adjusted itself.

MFS62 Aug 13 2015 01:24 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Somebody put an armed guard around Ashie. His IGT mojo has to be protected. Later

batmagadanleadoff Aug 13 2015 02:08 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

The last time the Mets were 11 games over .500 was on June 27, 2010.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 13 2015 02:11 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I was at the two games that came after that date, in San Juan, Puerto Rico. As that graph shows, about a week later the wheels came off and the season unraveled.

Ceetar Aug 13 2015 02:12 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Tuesday August 19th,2008 for 12 over.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 13 2015 02:14 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I was at the two games that came after that date, in San Juan, Puerto Rico. As that graph shows, about a week later the wheels came off and the season unraveled. I remember that series and I remember you being there. Marlins, right? Swept the Mets. That was Dickey's first year as a Met, and by June, he had, surprisingly, developed into an excellent pitcher. June 2010 was also Strasburg mania at full hype and Strasburg at his scariest best.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 13 2015 02:18 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I can barely remember there being a baseball season in 2010 much less the Mets being 11 games over .500 in it. Wow.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 13 2015 02:20 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I can barely remember there being a baseball season in 2010 much less the Mets being 11 games over .500 in it. Wow. Same here. I woulda never guessed that the Mets were 11 over as recently as 2010. I woulda bet sometime during the 2006-08 years.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 13 2015 02:22 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

batmagadanleadoff wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I can barely remember there being a baseball season in 2010 much less the Mets being 11 games over .500 in it. Wow. Same here. I woulda never guessed that the Mets were 11 over as recently as 2010. I woulda bet sometime during the 2006-08 years. One look at the 2010 chart above and you could see how the train came off the tracks as soon as the Mets peaked.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 13 2015 02:22 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

The Mets lost the first two games they played in Puerto Rico (the two that I attended) but then won the third game, after we had returned home. It was a weird experience. It was a Marlins home game, with Billy Marlin on site, and a countdown to the new stadium in Miami, but it was totally a Mets crowd. No seventh-inning stretch, at all. When I'm at a game, I sometimes like to stand up before everyone else for the 7th-inning stretch and gesture for everyone to rise, and when they do I feel like they were all heeding my command. I did that in San Juan and nobody stood up. Nobody! And I know that there were a lot of people there from the mainland who made the trip, but somehow they knew that there's no seventh-inning stretch in Puerto Rico but no one told me.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 13 2015 02:23 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Aug 13 2015 02:29 PM

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I can barely remember there being a baseball season in 2010 much less the Mets being 11 games over .500 in it. Wow. Same here. I woulda never guessed that the Mets were 11 over as recently as 2010. I woulda bet sometime during the 2006-08 years. One look at the 2010 chart above and you could see how the train came off the tracks as soon as the Mets peaked. I'll tell you, I've owned some stocks that performed like that 2010 Mets chart.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 13 2015 02:23 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

batmagadanleadoff wrote: One look at the 2010 chart above and you could see how the train came off the tracks as soon as the Mets peaked. I remember that I saw it coming. (And I think it's documented somewhere on this forum.) I had this strong sense that they were playing over their heads, and unfortunately I was right.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 13 2015 02:29 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Aug 13 2015 02:33 PM

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It was a weird experience. It was a Marlins home game, with Billy Marlin on site ... but it was totally a Mets crowd. I went to Marlins Park last week for the entire three-game Mets/Marlins series. It was a weird experience for me, too. First of all, I doubt that even half the seats were occupied. That team just doesn't draw, even though their stadium's brand new and the Marlins have two of baseball's most exciting young stars. The third of three decks was apparently closed off entirely. This reminded me of the lean Joe Torre - two button pullover jersey era when the Upper Deck at Shea was closed off. And then the crowds ... they were Met crowds -- I mean more than half of the attendees were Mets fans, in Mets garb and rooting for the Mets. And I'm not exaggerating this post by even a pixel.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 13 2015 02:32 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: One look at the 2010 chart above and you could see how the train came off the tracks as soon as the Mets peaked. I remember that I saw it coming. (And I think it's documented somewhere on this forum.) I had this strong sense that they were playing over their heads, and unfortunately I was right. Those charts are fantastic. You can skim it and see immediately that in 2010, the Mets just clustered a lot of wins in a short period of time. Specifically, they won 11 out of 12 in early June, and that run, compressed into two weeks, accounts for the chart spike.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 13 2015 02:33 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: One look at the 2010 chart above and you could see how the train came off the tracks as soon as the Mets peaked. I remember that I saw it coming. (And I think it's documented somewhere on this forum.) I had this strong sense that they were playing over their heads, and unfortunately I was right. Looks like I surrendered on July 25.

Frayed Knot Aug 13 2015 02:44 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

One look at the 2010 chart above and you could see how the train came off the tracks as soon as the Mets peaked. I remember that I saw it coming. (And I think it's documented somewhere on this forum.) I had this strong sense that they were playing over their heads, and unfortunately I was right. I remember that too. It was one of those years that JCL put up his mid-season 'Predict the Shams'* polls so I stopped for a sec and thought about it (I'm usually not big on trying to predict what's going to happen next) and it suddenly hit me; 'OMG they're going to totally suck!!' I forget what it was specifically at that point (probably a bunch of stuff) but, yeah, you could smell that one coming. Quite unlike last year by contrast where I thought they were going to have a much better second half until getting buried in August [12-17] thanks to ridiculously sucky performances by Granderson [.147/.231/.183] & the soon to be shut-down for the remainder Wright [.232 in Aug on 23 hits: 22 singles + 1 double] * [Second Half Mets]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 13 2015 04:13 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Frayed Knot wrote: ... I thought they were going to have a much better second half until getting buried in August [12-17] thanks to ridiculously sucky performances by Granderson... Em...

Zvon Aug 13 2015 04:36 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I was at the two games that came after that date, in San Juan, Puerto Rico. As that graph shows, about a week later the wheels came off and the season unraveled. I remember that series well, although I wish I didn't. I was bitching about the lack of an off day and was positive were were jinxed by the demons in the crowd.

dgwphotography Aug 13 2015 05:15 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: One look at the 2010 chart above and you could see how the train came off the tracks as soon as the Mets peaked. I remember that I saw it coming. (And I think it's documented somewhere on this forum.) I had this strong sense that they were playing over their heads, and unfortunately I was right. Looks like I surrendered on July 25. ...and 5 years later, that David Soul song is stuck in my head, again.

seawolf17 Aug 13 2015 06:33 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: It was a weird experience. It was a Marlins home game, with Billy Marlin on site ... but it was totally a Mets crowd. I went to Marlins Park last week for the entire three-game Mets/Marlins series. It was a weird experience for me, too. First of all, I doubt that even half the seats were occupied. That team just doesn't draw, even though their stadium's brand new and the Marlins have two of baseball's most exciting young stars. The third of three decks was apparently closed off entirely. This reminded me of the lean Joe Torre - two button pullover jersey era when the Upper Deck at Shea was closed off. And then the crowds ... they were Met crowds -- I mean more than half of the attendees were Mets fans, in Mets garb and rooting for the Mets. And I'm not exaggerating this post by even a pixel. Marlins park is a very strange place, yes. Went to a game earlier this season (the Ichiro HR off Torres game) and that was very Mets fan-heavy, and then went to Marlins-Phillies two nights later and that was Phillies fan-heavy.

Lefty Specialist Aug 14 2015 06:10 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Lastings Milledge is irrationally exuberant.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 14 2015 07:41 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I went to a game with Seawolf on July 11, 2010. Santana and the Mets shutout the Braves. The Mets were 48-40. There was a buzz in the crowd that felt like maybe the Mets are going to make a run. We were wrong.

dgwphotography Aug 14 2015 07:47 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Lefty Specialist wrote: Lastings Milledge is irrationally exuberant. I would be, too if I was making over $1 mill a year to play baseball in Japan...

Benjamin Grimm Aug 14 2015 08:21 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Wow, ten of the Mets' remaining 47 games are against the Phillies. Six against the Marlins.

metirish Aug 14 2015 08:34 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Philles playing good ball apparently, not that I am looking at them tho

batmagadanleadoff Aug 14 2015 09:37 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Wow, ten of the Mets' remaining 47 games are against the Phillies. Six against the Marlins. Baseball's worst two teams play in the NL East. Without looking anything up, I figured that this would give the Mets an advantage in the Wild Card race, but not necessarily in their battle for first place with the Nationals. As it turns out, the Nats have 19 remaining games against the Marlins and the Phillies.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 14 2015 09:39 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

It's time for the Marlins and Phillies to be a thorn in someone else's side.

Ashie62 Aug 14 2015 12:10 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This is all very real. Reminds me of 1973 when I had to get the OOTS on a transistor radio every fifteen minutes on WINS. This is as fun as that was.

Rockin' Doc Aug 14 2015 06:48 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Winning is fun! I had almost forgotten how much fun it was to have the Mets contending for a pennant down the stretch.

Lefty Specialist Aug 15 2015 05:05 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

R.A. Dickey is Rationally Axuberant.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 15 2015 05:46 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Rockin' Doc wrote: Winning is fun! I had almost forgotten how much fun it was to have the Mets contending for a pennant down the stretch. It is nice! I'm more "all in" than I have been in years, watching bigger chunks of games and afterwards not feeling like I've wasted my time.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 15 2015 07:40 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

When I woke up this morning, one of the first things I did was to check the final score for last night's late west coast Nationals game. I can't remember the last time I did anything like that.

Lefty Specialist Aug 15 2015 07:50 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

batmagadanleadoff wrote: When I woke up this morning, one of the first things I did was to check the final score for last night's late west coast Nationals game. I can't remember the last time I did anything like that. I hung with GameCast until it was 6-1 Giants, and Scherzer was well and truly bombed. It's the modern equivalent of the transistor radio under the pillow when you're supposed to be sleeping.

Lefty Specialist Aug 16 2015 05:44 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mo Vaughn is Rationally Exuberant.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 16 2015 05:49 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I have to say, I'm more confident of the Mets ability to win the division than I am of their likelihood of going deep into the playoffs. But getting there is the first order of business. Things will probably look different (for better or worse) in early October from where we are now.

dgwphotography Aug 16 2015 12:02 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Rockin' Doc wrote: Winning is fun! I had almost forgotten how much fun it was to have the Mets contending for a pennant down the stretch. It is nice! I'm more "all in" than I have been in years, watching bigger chunks of games and afterwards not feeling like I've wasted my time. I am too. It's mainly due to the fact that the front office showed they were "all in" with the moves they made at the deadline.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 16 2015 05:15 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Maybe I picked the wrong weekend to go all in.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 16 2015 06:17 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This was an exuberance-deadening weekend.

Lefty Specialist Aug 17 2015 05:15 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Despite the deadening, Tom Seaver is still rationally exuberant.

Ashie62 Aug 17 2015 06:40 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Didn't know Seaver's package was that big.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 17 2015 06:57 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Only when he's exuberant.

Edgy MD Aug 25 2015 01:45 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Seeing as how they did what they did last night without their two best 2015 hitters — Granderson and Duda — I'm starting to think that really have turned a corner and have a really good lineup and that last night, leaving aside the last-place-opponent factor, was real. Irrational?

Benjamin Grimm Aug 25 2015 01:59 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I don't think so. The Mets have become a good team. I'm optimistic for a division title, more wary about going much beyond that, but let's see what happens!

Lefty Specialist Aug 25 2015 02:13 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Edgy MD wrote: Seeing as how they did what they did last night without their two best 2015 hitters — Granderson and Duda — I'm starting to think that really have turned a corner and have a really good lineup and that last night, leaving aside the last-place-opponent factor, was real. Irrational? A month ago I would have said yes. But things seem to be clicking now.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 25 2015 03:23 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

The Howard home run and deGrom's struggles early on had me thinking just a teeny bit "Same Old Mets." But then they came back and kept scoring and scoring and scoring. And the bullpen kept the Phillies from scoring any more. Howard even made a base-running blunder. In past years it would've been a Met blundering and the Phillies capitalizing. Games like last night feel like the start of an exorcism of the Mets-Phillies contests of 2007. Of course, we'll know the demon is gone for sure when the Mets clinch the division with a comfortable lead some time in September.

Edgy MD Aug 25 2015 03:28 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Notable is that Cespedes is one lazy-assed baserunner — including last night — and one of these days, I suspect, that trait of his will munch on the Mets' behinds.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 25 2015 03:30 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Edgy MD wrote: Notable is that Cespedes is one lazy-assed baserunner — including last night — and one of these days, I suspect, that trait of his will munch on the Mets' behinds. Also Notable that Cespedes' great throws to nail baserunners often seem to come after he misplayed the ball.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 25 2015 03:30 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

He can be a lazy fielder too. Hopefully he can avoid making a costly blunder for the next two months.

MFS62 Aug 25 2015 09:44 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I can't wait to exuber. Later

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 25 2015 09:46 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Edgy MD wrote: Notable is that Cespedes is one lazy-assed baserunner — including last night — and one of these days, I suspect, that trait of his will munch on the Mets' behinds. I got problems with several of our new guys - Cespedes tries so hard to hit home runs he barely does anything right beyond that (aside from the inevitable doubles, and don't think I'm devaluing dingers cuz I'm not). Clippard is impossible to watch -- excruciatingly slow working. If I were the Phillies I'd be on him for 'slow-pitching' them. O'Flaherty sucks.

Centerfield Aug 26 2015 06:39 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Agreed on all points. O'Flaherty not only sucks, but he his entire being is irritating. He has that loser quality about him that I have not seen since Trachsel. (completely subjective, I know, but he bothers me). We are seeing the best of Cespedes recently, but if you look at this track record, he is not an elite HR hitter, and he does not hit for average or walk at all. Let's hope he rides this current hot streak for the remainder of his time here. I am concerned that the starting pitching may be getting tired, as someone mentioned in the IGT. Am especially concerned about Syndegaard, who seemingly after making the adjustment to big league pitching, has reverted to his Wheeler-like debut. But not to get too down, I am encouraged that: 1. Familia looked NASTY again. 2. Duda is getting rest, and the real doctor in LA confirms it's minor. I wonder if he had the back issue during his slump but felt he couldn't take the time off because the rest of the lineup sucked. 3. We are getting Matz back soon. 4. Gee had a great start in LV. I wonder if we can make him a short reliever in September. He throws strikes, changes speeds. I think he can do it.

Frayed Knot Aug 26 2015 06:59 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Had Francesa on for five minutes (must have been on Monday) and heard some caller trying to give Cespedes $130 mil over 4 years. And even Francesa, who was on the Cespedes bandwagon before he ever got here, had to talk the caller off the ledge by saying that he was too high by at least half, particularly for a team with 3 OFs already under contract for 2016 plus Conforto & Nimmo knocking on the door (Mike didn't say that last part, I did). So, yeah, let's just enjoy the ride while it lasts because he certainly doesn't seem like a Sandy guy even before Medgel jumps in a cites his non-signing as another reason to work Madoff's name into an article.

Edgy MD Aug 26 2015 07:15 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Now that Gilmartin is no longer the guy you don't want to use in a game situation, O'Flaherty has inherited that mantle. Unfortunately, even with those guys, circumstances still force you to use them in win-lose situations once every week or two, and last night was that night for O'Flaherty. Hopefully that's the last time such a circumstance comes up in August, and he can use the first half of September to try and find himself in lower leverage spots.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 26 2015 07:40 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Only six more games until the rosters expand, which will give Terry more flexibility, as I'm pretty sure they'll add a few relievers. I think the most rested guy in the bullpen at the moment is probably Carlos Torres? If Bartolo doesn't go seven innings (and I suspect he won't) I think we may need to squeeze two innings out of Carlos.

Nymr83 Aug 26 2015 07:50 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Frayed Knot wrote: So, yeah, let's just enjoy the ride while it lasts because he certainly doesn't seem like a Sandy guy even before Medgel jumps in a cites his non-signing as another reason to work Madoff's name into an article. At this point there is a pretty serious inverse correlation among anyone who the Mets between the quality of their writing and the frequency with which they mention Madoff.

Nymr83 Aug 26 2015 07:57 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Only six more games until the rosters expand, which will give Terry more flexibility, as I'm pretty sure they'll add a few relievers. I think the most rested guy in the bullpen at the moment is probably Carlos Torres? If Bartolo doesn't go seven innings (and I suspect he won't) I think we may need to squeeze two innings out of Carlos. I'm getting a little tired of the Bartolo act as well, he's eaten some innings and probably eaten a lot post-game, pre-game, and between innings as well, but he just kinda SUCKS at this point. a 4.90 ERA in the National League in 2015 is just not acceptable. 44 starting pitchers have enough innings to qualify for the ERA title in the National League. Colon ranks 42nd among them in ERA. Only Matt Garza and Kyle Lohse pitching for Milwaukee are worse. Only 2 other pitchers on contending teams are even within a full run of him! he needs to get sat down or even outright cut when Matz comes back. If he starts a postseason game Alderson and Terry should both be fired.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 26 2015 08:11 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I can't imagine him starting a postseason game, unless there's a spate of injuries. If there's to be a six-man rotation in September, I'd prefer to see it as deGrom, Harvey, Niese, Syndergaard, Matz, and Verrett. Bartolo gives an occasional good start, but too many bad ones. I think he's pitched himself out of the rotation.

Edgy MD Aug 26 2015 09:09 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I can certainly imagine him starting. And I can certainly imagine a spate of injuries. Five and half weeks or so are left in the season. Think about where the Mets were five and half weeks ago, and ... things can change fast.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 26 2015 10:57 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Nymr83 wrote: At this point there is a pretty serious inverse correlation among anyone who the Mets between the quality of their writing and the frequency with which they mention Madoff. Clearly, the mature thing to do now is to shitcan any writer who dares to write Madoff and the Mets in the same sentence; to ignore that the Madoff scam ever affected the Mets finances; and to pretend that either money doesn't matter, or if it did, that Alderson has at his disposal, unfettered access to a $130M payroll budget that every NY MLB team should always have. Doesn't the Madoff scam make this Mets story that's unfolding even more compelling?

Lefty Specialist Aug 26 2015 12:05 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Notable is that Cespedes is one lazy-assed baserunner — including last night — and one of these days, I suspect, that trait of his will munch on the Mets' behinds. I got problems with several of our new guys - Cespedes tries so hard to hit home runs he barely does anything right beyond that (aside from the inevitable doubles, and don't think I'm devaluing dingers cuz I'm not). Clippard is impossible to watch -- excruciatingly slow working. If I were the Phillies I'd be on him for 'slow-pitching' them. O'Flaherty sucks. Clippard is hard to watch, but he generally gets out of his messes, and I'd rather have him pitching the 8th than anybody else. Cespedes, yes, you can see the flaws in his game, and he can be too casual in his approach. I'm kind of glad they won't be committing to him long-term, because I could see his act getting tiring after a while. But damn, he's talented. O'Flaherty- trap door. Uribe- Every time he gets up Keith says 'he doesn't get cheated' after his takes a powerful swing and a miss. Far better defensively than I expected, though, and he runs into one occasionally. Kelly Johnson- a bit of a disappointment, but he's a pro, and I'd rather have him coming off my bench than Eric Campbell. Conforto- 2016 came early. The average is starting to come up, and he doesn't seem fazed by the heat of a pennant race. What these guys have provided is the flexibility Terry was missing. When you're putting up Danny Muno to pinch hit, you might as well leave the pitcher in. And now you can play matchups all over the infield and outfield. It's what real teams do and it had been lacking. Now you can rest Granderson against lefties. You can have a Cuddyer pinch-hit in a crucial situation instead of Darrell Ceciliani. You can bring in a Juan Lagares for late-inning defense. So many more good choices than just a month ago.

Edgy MD Aug 26 2015 12:55 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Yeah, all that. Talk about versatility. They can platoon all over the field — and almost are. And come September, stacking the lineup one way or the other won't leave them with a one-sided bench. And Terry shifts Wilmer Flores willy-nilly between short and second without twisting his hands in worry over whether it would undermine his confidence, unlike the first half when he was loathe to move him off shortstop lest "Wilmer Sucks" appear on the back page. And — how 'bout that? — Wilmer is seemingly playing with all the confidence in the world. They all seem to be. They all have a meaningful role on a team driving pennant-wards. They have the versatility to absorb a lineup loss like Duda, which might well have been devastating in other circumstances. Now it's all, "Whoah, hey, don't force things, big guy. We're up by five games and we're going to need you down the road. Go get well. We got this."

Benjamin Grimm Aug 26 2015 01:05 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Anthony Martino had an article in the Daily News today about how the Mets have a whole new attitude from what they had in late July, just before Sandy made the Uribe/Johnson trade. I like the point made above about Conforto. It's great that he's getting his growing pains in now. By next April, if he has a starting job (and he likely will) he'll be all the more ready for it. I'm glad the Mets have Clippard. And Gilmartin too. I expect we'll see Dario Alvarez next week too. And Verrett can enhance the bullpen for a little while before his next start. Good point about Wilmer and the switching between second and shortstop. If you treat players like they're little children, then they'll expect to be treated like little children.

Edgy MD Aug 26 2015 01:16 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

A big part of what I hate about designated closers. Given enough time, almost all of them become entitled yutzes.

Frayed Knot Aug 26 2015 01:20 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I suspect the Wilmer can't leave SS policy was more organizational than something decided by just Terry. They were afraid of the bad publicity for failing to find a "real" SS over the winter and moving Flores elsewhere would have looked like an admission that the one they settled for wasn't cutting it either. But now that the've taken the bold plunge, the result wasn't nearly as bad as what they feared.

Ceetar Aug 26 2015 01:36 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Frayed Knot wrote: I suspect the Wilmer can't leave SS policy was more organizational than something decided by just Terry. They were afraid of the bad publicity for failing to find a "real" SS over the winter and moving Flores elsewhere would have looked like an admission that the one they settled for wasn't cutting it either. But now that the've taken the bold plunge, the result wasn't nearly as bad as what they feared. I suspect it's just that they don't like Ruben Tejada. Until August, Wilmer Flores was one of the worst hitters on the team and should sat. It wasn't about them refusing to move him to 2B, it was that they weren't going to play Tejada so might as well give Flores the AB where they don't have _any_ options while experimenting with seeing if guys like Muno, Herrera, or Campbell would provide anything.

Frayed Knot Aug 26 2015 02:09 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

It wasn't about them refusing to move him to 2B It was specifically about refusing to move him to 2B, as even when they DID play Flores & Tejada in the same lineup it was Tejada who was shifted to 2B not Flores. Flores, for instance, NEVER started at 2B until June 28 but has started their 28 times since. Tejada started at SS Only when Flores wasn't in the starting lineup at all (8 times) again until June 28 yet has started there 38 times since. That's not Tejada hatred, it's a clear mid-year change in direction which suggests -- hell, it outright screams -- previous adherence to a strict policy even when it took precedence over logical in-game strategy.

Edgy MD Aug 26 2015 02:15 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

“He’s done fine. That’s why I just want to leave him alone. The minute you move him, controversy starts. Then when you move him back, more controversy. We’re trying to play baseball here and stay away from the back page.” — Terry Collins, circa June 4

Ashie62 Aug 26 2015 04:01 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Wilmer Flores is one of our best players. Good enough for me.

Edgy MD Aug 26 2015 04:05 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Frayed Knot wrote: It wasn't about them refusing to move him to 2B It was specifically about refusing to move him to 2B, as even when they DID play Flores & Tejada in the same lineup it was Tejada who was shifted to 2B not Flores. And lest it be forgotten, he was placed at third base as well for two weeks or so, leading the booth to frequently comment that the team had three guys out of position that needed to rotated clockwise.

Nymr83 Aug 26 2015 08:23 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

How sweet would it be if we could sweep the Nationals and make the 2nd series against them meaningless? The Yankees could roll into town with 9 games left and the Mets more concerned about getting the postseason rotation in order than they are about the "subway series"

Mets – Willets Point Aug 26 2015 08:32 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

So the much vaunted rotation is struggling and the suddenly explosive offense has to keep bailing them out. But then the one starter we'd given up on comes out and pitches 7 shutout innings in a bandbox. That's so 2015 Mets.

Frayed Knot Aug 26 2015 08:48 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

It's almost time to start lining up jokes about the offense wanting to sue the pitching staff for non-support.

Centerfield Aug 27 2015 07:17 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

"That's right. Mets fan. You remember correctly." "No, definitely, it's been fun." "The streak? Which one, we've had a few now." "Well, actually there were two in August." "Yeah, really. Yup. There was the one where they swept the Nationals and took over first, and then there was the one later in the month where they extended their lead and ripped out the Nationals' hearts."

themetfairy Aug 27 2015 07:18 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

The Nationals have hearts?

Centerfield Aug 27 2015 07:31 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Well not anymore. Duh.

Centerfield Aug 28 2015 07:28 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I don't know if I am irrationally exuberant anymore. I think I am more bewildered/dumbfounded/sitting in front of the TV with mouth hanging open in disbelief. I like to think that the Nats saw the 5-0 score and were glad to see it, but knew that the game was far from over. I also like to think that as they saw the score change to 5-2, 5-4, then tied at 5, that they knew what was eventually coming. I picture them watching after their game ended, jumping out of their seats during the foul HR, then sitting back down dejectedly. After the Murphy double I see Jason Werth angrily getting up and switching off the TV, and saying "Who fucking cares. We just have to do our part and keep winning." And everyone walking away shaking their heads. I don't know why the Nationals locker room TV does not have a remote. I can't answer everything.

Ceetar Aug 28 2015 07:33 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: I don't know why the Nationals locker room TV does not have a remote. I can't answer everything. Jonathan Papelbon absconding with it when Storen tried to decide what they were going to watch postgame and then he lost it.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 28 2015 07:39 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I read a few things online. The Nationals are pointing to recent examples of other teams that were behind in August and stormed into first place with a strong September. They feel that the same thing can happen with them. And they're right. It doesn't mean it will happen, but it can, and fictional Jayson Werth is right, the Nationals have to concentrate on winning each game. I wish I could peek ahead at the standings two weeks from today. At that point, with the three games in DC behind us, we'll have a much clearer idea of the challenge ahead. If the Mets lead is still 5 or 6 games at that point, they'll be in really good shape. And if it's 7 or 8 or more, then even better.

soupcan Aug 28 2015 08:26 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I just hope that the 2015 Mets are as aware of '7 up with 17 to play' as we are.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 28 2015 08:31 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

"Fictional Jayson Werth" needs a Twitter account.

MFS62 Aug 28 2015 08:33 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: I don't know if I am irrationally exuberant anymore. I think I am more bewildered/dumbfounded/sitting in front of the TV with mouth hanging open in disbelief. Maybe not exuberant, but: I'm wild again Beguiled again A simpering, whimpering child again Bewitched, bothered and bewildered, am I And I like it. Later

Frayed Knot Aug 28 2015 08:54 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: I like to think that the Nats saw the 5-0 score and were glad to see it, but knew that the game was far from over. I also like to think that as they saw the score change to 5-2, 5-4, then tied at 5, that they knew what was eventually coming. I was trying to switch on the Nats game every once in a while just to hear how their announcing duo was reacting to changing scores in the NYM/PHI game. Did manage to catch at least one reaction to some NYM runs which I would describe as a kind of resigned disbelief. It was like he wanted to say "How the Fuck are those guys doing it?!?" but managed to restrain himself.

Farmer Ted Aug 28 2015 10:46 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

May 24, 2015: Mrs. Ted: 9-1 Pirates in the 7th. Mother fuckers. Niese sucks. Farmer Ted: Sons-a-bitches. I fucking quit those assholes. August 27, 2015: Mrs. Ted: 5-0 Phillies in the 3rd. Mother fuckers. Niese sucks. Farmer Ted: [Yawn] I'm going to take a shower. It should be tied up by the time I get back. Soak it in folks. Soak it in.

d'Kong76 Aug 28 2015 10:55 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: "Fictional Jayson Werth" needs a Twitter account. Yeah @f'JWerth... hee hee

TransMonk Aug 28 2015 11:11 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Lefty Specialist Aug 28 2015 11:14 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

It's not so much exuberance as it is this tingly feeling that says, "Hey, they might actually pull this off." What team goes 10 GAMES and over 400 plate appearances without a home run in June and then hits 43 in 24 games in August? I mean, that just doesn't happen. Until now, anyway. It's like Damn Yankees and we're the Washington Senators. Come to think of it, Terry looks a bit like Ray Walston.

dinosaur jesus Aug 28 2015 11:43 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Lefty Specialist wrote: It's not so much exuberance as it is this tingly feeling that says, "Hey, they might actually pull this off." What team goes 10 GAMES and over 400 plate appearances without a home run in June and then hits 43 in 24 games in August? I mean, that just doesn't happen. Until now, anyway. It's like Damn Yankees and we're the Washington Senators. Come to think of it, Terry looks a bit like Ray Walston.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 28 2015 12:02 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Some advice for Blue Jays fans that works for Mets fans as well.

Lefty Specialist Aug 28 2015 12:57 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

"Whatever Duuuuda wants......Duuuuuda gets........."

RealityChuck Aug 28 2015 01:05 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

As I mentioned elsewhere (and it's still true), there has only been one day since July 31 where the Nationals gained ground on the Mets.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 28 2015 01:09 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Actually, there have been three since August 3: Return of the NHOP

dgwphotography Aug 28 2015 01:31 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: Some advice for Blue Jays fans that works for Mets fans as well. That was a good read. There’s no greater feeling than being a fan of a baseball team that just got good, and you never know when the wins will either stop coming or become routine. This is exactly why the summer of 1985 was more fun than the summer of 1986.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 28 2015 01:35 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

There was also more suspense in 1985 than in 1986, when the Mets ran away with the division. In 1986, all of the suspense of 1985 was compressed into the month of October, which was, and will always remain, the greatest baseball month of my life.

Frayed Knot Aug 28 2015 01:37 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This is exactly why the summer of 1985 was more fun than the summer of 1986. And why '84 might have been better still. Among my Met fan friends of the '86 era, if you wanted to talk Mets but weren't well-versed on the '84 team we automatically dismissed you as a bandwagon jumper.

dinosaur jesus Aug 28 2015 01:46 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

1984 was the most fun. 1985 was the most exciting. The last series with St. Louis in 1985 was incredible.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 28 2015 01:50 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

1984 had its own kind of magic, but by late July or early August I had a sense that it wasn't going to happen for the Mets. The excitement in 1985 went all the way to the end of the season, and I hadn't experienced anything like that since 1973, when I was only ten and too young to appreciate it. 1999 had a similar exciting ending, and one that ended better. If I was born 10 or 15 years later than I was, I think 1999 would be my favorite season. But I was older and more jaded by then, so for me it's 1985.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 28 2015 02:04 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I was an 84 man myself. Still hate Rick Sutcliffe too. Lots of 1985 & 1999 parallels.

Nymr83 Aug 28 2015 03:35 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: 1984 had its own kind of magic, but by late July or early August I had a sense that it wasn't going to happen for the Mets. The excitement in 1985 went all the way to the end of the season, and I hadn't experienced anything like that since 1973, when I was only ten and too young to appreciate it. 1999 had a similar exciting ending, and one that ended better. If I was born 10 or 15 years later than I was, I think 1999 would be my favorite season. But I was older and more jaded by then, so for me it's 1985. Yeah, born in 83 my favorite years are 98-99, 2000 sucked so bad the way it ended that I'd rather watch Kenny Rogers Fuck us over again.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 28 2015 04:44 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This might be the most remarkable month in franchise history. About four weeks ago, the Mets were as lifeless and moribund as its ever been in the Citi Field era -- and had just added another fiasco to its long list of lolmets stuff. Today, we're planning the post-season rotation. And it's still not even September. And screw those Baseball Prospectus odds. If the Mets win the division, they have as good a chance as anybody to take home the crown, barring injuries.

cooby Aug 28 2015 05:10 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

'73 for me. Never ever forget it. I'd go back to that year without a qualm. Loved it; every minute of that summer.

d'Kong76 Aug 28 2015 07:12 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

KB just told me not to get cocky, and said there's a whole month of September left. (I wasn't being cocky, just said the Mets were wining again)

Ashie62 Aug 29 2015 04:41 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I got chewed out by my mailman for mentioning the Mets magic number.

cooby Aug 31 2015 02:02 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

After thinking about this a while I remembered that I absolutely adored the 2000 team too. I hope this the right thread

Zvon Aug 31 2015 02:59 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

cooby wrote: '73 for me. Never ever forget it. I'd go back to that year without a qualm. Loved it; every minute of that summer. Anyone weened in '73 has gone through their baseball life knowing full well that anything is possible in baseball.

Farmer Ted Sep 09 2015 10:05 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Not going to lie. Skipped over a curb today.

Lefty Specialist Sep 09 2015 10:16 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I rarely dance on the furniture. But I did last night.

TransMonk Sep 09 2015 11:04 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I clapped so hard that my hands still stung an hour later.

Centerfield Sep 09 2015 12:06 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

The cool thing is that this thread is more than a month old, and we are even more exuberant than when it started. Hopefully we'll be saying the same thing a month from now. (and maybe even one more after that)

Ceetar Sep 09 2015 12:07 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: The cool thing is that this thread is more than a month old, and we are even more exuberant than when it started. Hopefully we'll be saying the same thing a month from now. (and maybe even one more after that) But it's more and more rational.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 09 2015 12:07 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

And the exuberance is more and more rational with each week that passes. (EDIT: Oops... Ceetar's reply snuck in just ahead of mine.)

Centerfield Sep 09 2015 12:11 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

For the record, when this thread started the Mets were 58-50. 2 games in front of the Washington Nationals (55-51).

Benjamin Grimm Sep 09 2015 12:19 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Actually, on the morning of August 5, when this thread started, the Mets were 57-50, the lead was 1 game, the magic number was 56, and the NHOP was .500. Things have only brightened since then.

Centerfield Sep 09 2015 12:21 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Wow, that really was irrational.

Mets – Willets Point Sep 09 2015 01:21 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

It was due to the Mets gained solo possession of first place following a sweep of the Nats and the trade deadline.

Centerfield Sep 10 2015 08:08 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This game is crazy. You battle all year long, then in one series, you have such huge swings. If Storen retires Cespedes Tuesday and Wednesday, the lead could easily be 3 games. Instead it's 7. What a crazy game. It occurred to me yesterday that the Mets have never won a closely fought division race in my lifetime. In 2006, it was a run away. In '88 they won by 15 games. In '86 they won by 1000 games. That's it. 1973 was 2 years before I was born. Even the wild card in 2000 wasn't close. The only close race they've won during my life was in 1999, and that was the wild card. Maybe at the end of the day, this will be considered a run away, but for the first time, I might see a Mets team win a tight division.

Ceetar Sep 10 2015 08:13 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: It occurred to me yesterday that the Mets have never won a closely fought division race in my lifetime. In 2006, it was a run away. In '88 they won by 15 games. In '86 they won by 1000 games. That's it. 1973 was 2 years before I was born. Even the wild card in 2000 wasn't close. The only close race they've won during my life was in 1999, and that was the wild card. Maybe at the end of the day, this will be considered a run away, but for the first time, I might see a Mets team win a tight division. yeah. 1999 was it. At the time the Wild Card was fine, not a one and done. We've seen them _lose_ tight races. Same feeling without the joy at the end I suspect. This is mostly a runaway. At least in the sense that they've never really gotten to the point where dropping any one game is more than a 'oops, would've liked to have that'. Maybe that stupid Upton game, but that was too early.

Rockin' Doc Sep 10 2015 11:00 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: ...1973 was 2 years before I was born. Ouch, that hurt.

Mets – Willets Point Sep 10 2015 11:25 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Rockin' Doc wrote: Centerfield wrote: ...1973 was 2 years before I was born. Ouch, that hurt. I was in-utero for the 1973 season, myself.

Elster88 Sep 11 2015 09:12 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This is pretty amazin. So excited.

Lefty Specialist Sep 11 2015 09:41 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I was a kid in 1969. I thought every year would be like that. Little did I know the scar tissue and frustration I would accumulate in the intervening 46 years. So when the good times come, I'm happy to drink from the fire hose.

RealityChuck Sep 12 2015 07:05 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I've been around for all of the Mets' pennant races, but 1969 sticks out the most. In 73 I was in college and battling mononucleosis, so I missed most of the race. BTW, it looks like the team will be keeping up its streak of making the playoffs in every decade of its existence.

Centerfield Sep 24 2015 08:22 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This game I like very much.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 24 2015 09:26 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Totally rational now.

Elster88 Sep 24 2015 09:36 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I'm exuberating.

MFS62 Sep 24 2015 09:46 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I'm not exubing yet, but I'm breathing hard. Later

d'Kong76 Sep 25 2015 06:41 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I have ants in my pants. Let's wrap this puppy up over the weekend and exuberate for a long cool week.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 25 2015 06:57 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Yesterday, knowing that the Nationals had already lost I went into the Mets-Reds game with more of a sense of ease than I've had in weeks. I do want them to lock this thing down as soon as possible, but it will take a few consecutive bad days for me to start getting nervous again.

Ceetar Sep 25 2015 07:16 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Yesterday, knowing that the Nationals had already lost I went into the Mets-Reds game with more of a sense of ease than I've had in weeks. I do want them to lock this thing down as soon as possible, but it will take a few consecutive bad days for me to start getting nervous again. or two weeks, which ever comes first.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Sep 25 2015 07:41 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Y'know what would be irrational? A sudden roadtrip to Cincy. I don't think Wifey is going to allow it, but...

Benjamin Grimm Sep 25 2015 07:44 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I had similar thoughts when I saw all of those empty seats last night. I was wondering if the Pope would want to drop everything and join me on a quick jaunt to Cincinnati.

Mets – Willets Point Sep 25 2015 10:05 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This is my favorite thread I've ever started.

Lefty Specialist Sep 25 2015 11:44 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I had similar thoughts when I saw all of those empty seats last night. I was wondering if the Pope would want to drop everything and join me on a quick jaunt to Cincinnati. We had the same thought. "How much for a flight to Cincinnati this weekend?" (Checks Kayak and Orbitz)"$975. EACH." "Oh. How long of a drive is it?" "About 11 or 12 hours. Each way." "Oh. I guess we can watch on TV, then."

Elster88 Sep 25 2015 09:49 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

LET'S GO METS GO

themetfairy Sep 26 2015 04:56 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I'm feeling pretty optimistic at this point.

Vic Sage Sep 27 2015 10:46 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

i'm starting to come around.

Centerfield Oct 09 2015 08:39 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I don't do well with post-season games. I feel like I should just put that out there. It is almost more stress than I can handle. I am tense when the other team is batting. I feel like at any moment, the game could get away, and then all is lost. I am frustrated when the Mets are batting. Feeling like every scoreless frame is a lost opportunity. Ninth innings? Forget it. There are times I have to walk away when the closer is on the mound. I certainly can't be trusted to be around other people during these games. I'm going to try to be different about it this year. Enjoy the post-season and remind myself that this is a season of irrational exuberance. A bonus. I really never thought we'd get here this year. Deep breaths.

Edgy MD Oct 09 2015 09:05 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Hey, it's such a crapshoot. It's the playoffs. There's no bottom feeding. They're facing the best of the best, and the whole thing can turn on a single performance that is a complete outlier. (A game-winning homer by Mike Scoscia off of Dwight Gooden? GtF outa here!) The Dodgers are the most expensive team of all time, an organization that totally over-loaded their plate at the salad bar, producing a roster that is an astounding 24.4% more expensive than the second-costliest team. And yet they've been playoff also-rans six times since 2004, and the qualifying difference this year was a non-roster free-agent signee utility infielder released by the Mets turning out to be their best hitter. So, yeah, sweat it. Nothing's gonna come easy. But if it makes you feel any better, the Dodgers fans and everybody associated with them (except Vin Scully) is sweating it to. Mattingly's only got his head on the line, so no biggie.

TransMonk Oct 09 2015 09:07 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I think "sweating it" is part of the excitement of the playoffs. Without the possibility of bitter defeat, the taste victory is not as sweet.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 09 2015 09:12 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Yeah, it's all fun. Suspenseful fun. Remember, the outcome of these games doesn't affect our actual lives. This stuff isn't important at all -- unless the Mets win, of course.

Edgy MD Oct 09 2015 09:18 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

It's true. At the end of the 2006 playoffs, I kept waiting for the Cardinals to come by and seize my possessions. To strip the clothes from my back and throw my wife into their victory wagon along with the spouses of other fans. They never came. I thought I'd be chained in the basement of an Anny Busch factory working 16-hour days for no pay and subsistence rations. Didn't, in fact, happen.

TransMonk Oct 09 2015 09:27 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Edgy MD wrote: I thought I'd be chained in the basement of an Anny Busch factory working 16 hour days for no pay and subsistence rations. Didn't, in fact, happen. Wait! So it was just me!?!

Mets – Willets Point Oct 09 2015 09:33 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Every morning for a year afterwards while I was waiting for the bus, Yadier Molina would come by and give me a wedgie.

Lefty Specialist Oct 09 2015 09:42 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Scott Rolen used to drive by my house daily, yelling "Yeah! Catch this, assholes! We won anyway!!!!"

Ceetar Oct 09 2015 09:51 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I had to move to stop Scott Spiezio from leaving flaming bags of poop on my stoop.

Fman99 Oct 09 2015 10:24 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I had my eyes pecked repeatedly by actual cardinals.

Centerfield Oct 09 2015 12:28 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I had it the worst. I had to grow and dye stupid chin fuzz like Scott Spezio for a year. It was terrible.

El Segundo Escupidor Oct 09 2015 06:31 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

As I have previously told some CPFers, I have a relationship with this girl which can be summarized thus: [youtube:2wmmigch]5XO3RQiAYgM[/youtube:2wmmigch] Also, I have no idea what this thread is about.

Centerfield Oct 10 2015 06:13 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Last night's game was also very enjoyable. I would like to partake in such festivities again tonight.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 10 2015 06:53 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Good morning Cranepoolians. If anything it feels even better now.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 10 2015 06:59 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Yes, it does! I seem to be constitutionally unable to sleep much past 7 a.m., so I'm pretty tired and very happy this morning. An afternoon nap is most definitely on my agenda for today.

Centerfield Oct 12 2015 11:03 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I guess it's only appropriate that in a season where we have experienced irrational exuberance, I have also felt unmitigated, persistent rage.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 12 2015 12:15 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This did raise the stakes. I was all about how nice it was to win a division title, and how anything they accomplish in the postseason is a bonus. But now, given the events of Saturday night, it would be intolerable, because it would be unjust, to lose this series.

dgwphotography Oct 12 2015 12:18 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: This did raise the stakes. I was all about how nice it was to win a division title, and how anything they accomplish in the postseason is a bonus. But now, given the events of Saturday night, it would be intolerable, because it would be unjust, to lose this series. Yup. Unlike CF, I haven't gotten over my unmitigated, persistent rage

d'Kong76 Oct 12 2015 12:22 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

To a certain degree, my fandom is in the balance with the remainder of this season. If the series gets stolen from us, I may very well hang up my proverbial cleats.

Centerfield Oct 12 2015 12:24 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

For the record, I am still angry. You don't write manifestos like I did in the other thread without being a little pissed. I also emailed it around hoping that one of the media guys will use it and call out that replay official for using his discretion to award Utley the base. It's just that now I'm back to being somewhat rational. And my wife let me go out in public again. Honestly, no exaggeration, I was so mad Saturday night I was shaking.

dgwphotography Oct 12 2015 12:27 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: For the record, I am still angry. You don't write manifestos like I did in the other thread without being a little pissed. I also emailed it around hoping that one of the media guys will use it and call out that replay official for using his discretion to award Utley the base. It's just that now I'm back to being somewhat rational. And my wife let me go out in public again. Honestly, no exaggeration, I was so mad Saturday night I was shaking. Seriously, the only thing that saved me was spending the weekend at Comic Con.

d'Kong76 Oct 12 2015 12:33 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Remember, the outcome of these games doesn't affect our actual lives. I don't know, I'm pretty much a basket case today! hahaha

TransMonk Oct 12 2015 12:39 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I never got ragey. In fact, I'm pretty impressed with the cool I've kept. Granted, I completely ignored anything baseball related on Sunday. However, when I found out this morning that the league was suspending Utley, I got more mad than ever. I mean, now, by suspending him, MLB is essentially saying that the umps got the call wrong on Saturday night. The Mets should have gotten out of the 7th with a 2-1 lead. That doesn't mean the Dodgers couldn't have won the game later, but it completely changes the game and series. I'm not a guy that usually ever blames the officiating when a team loses, but Saturday night was umping at it's worst. I still feel bad for Ruben...mostly because he is one of the CORE who played on some pretty bad Mets teams over the past several years.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 12 2015 12:54 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

TransMonk wrote: I never got ragey. In fact, I'm pretty impressed with the cool I've kept. Granted, I completely ignored anything baseball related on Sunday. I'm with you on that. I actually slept better on Saturday night than I did on Friday night. Friday night I was all happy and giddy, and didn't want to allow any sense of perspective to temper that joy. But after Saturday's game, I allowed myself to pull back, and think about it as little as possible. I decided I wasn't going to watch any of SNY's studio coverage, and was just going to not focus on baseball or the Mets too much until it was time for Game 3 to begin.

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 01:08 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

We've all been down this road. I mean, I can't really say I've never been this outraged. Utley was over-aggressive and should have gotten tossed. Roger Clemens was insane and should have gotten arrested. Yeah, Piazza walked away while Tejada very sadly did not, but the miscarriage of justice, given the evidence at hand, was just as insane if not more then. I don't know what happens to me after this series, but I don't think I'm quitting. I think I'm DOUBLING DOWN!

d'Kong76 Oct 12 2015 01:10 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Edgy MD wrote: I don't know what happens to me after this series, but I don't think I'm quitting. I think I'm DOUBLING DOWN! Well, we all know I'm fulla shit anyways!

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 01:11 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I mean, I may be nuts, but I'm not Will. [youtube:2376z3b0]BheBEQIKUxI[/youtube:2376z3b0] You out there, Will? We're here for you, Buddy!

d'Kong76 Oct 12 2015 01:16 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Will is calling from The Ledge... Will, you're on The Fan...

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 01:32 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Nice one.

Centerfield Oct 15 2015 09:23 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

More exuberance!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Benjamin Grimm Oct 15 2015 09:24 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I wasn't ready for this party to end. And now it won't!

Edgy MD Oct 15 2015 09:39 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

ASSHOLES FOR EVERYBODY!

themetfairy Oct 15 2015 09:46 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

It's pretty rational exuberance at the moment!

cooby Oct 15 2015 09:53 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I think assholes for everyone would be a great banner. Nobody would get it but us!

Benjamin Grimm Oct 15 2015 09:54 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I'd hate to think about what kind of a crowd that banner would attract.

Edgy MD Oct 15 2015 10:07 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

cooby wrote: I think assholes for everyone would be a great banner. Nobody would get it but us! And that would be such comforting consolation as we're ejected from the stadium by the top of the second.

Centerfield Oct 15 2015 10:37 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Not to be lost in all this, winning tonight extends the Mets career of Bartolo Colon. That alone is cause for celebration.

Edgy MD Oct 18 2015 06:40 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Tom Goodwin is notably exuberant.

Elster88 Oct 18 2015 07:24 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

That was great

Lefty Specialist Oct 21 2015 06:11 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

At this point, I may have to consult a physician as I am experiencing a 24/7, um, you know.

Centerfield Oct 21 2015 06:39 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I guess those ads work.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 21 2015 06:53 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I haven't gone to bed this happy this frequently since the month that I was engaged to Beyonce.

metirish Oct 21 2015 06:56 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Seeing a lot of people wearing Mets gear , in the Bronx where I live it's like they are feeling irrational exuberance

soupcan Oct 21 2015 07:06 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

metirish wrote: Seeing a lot of people wearing Mets gear , in the Bronx where I live it's like they are feeling irrational exuberance Mets gear is EVERYWHERE! Its about time.

dgwphotography Oct 21 2015 08:26 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I've gone from irrational exuberance to stunned disbelief.

MFS62 Oct 21 2015 09:41 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I just exubed. Later

Centerfield Oct 28 2015 08:13 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

You know what sucks? We get all the way to the World Series and I am not feeling exuberant at all. In fact, I was miserable (like no joke, like actually miserable) throughout all the extra innings. I should be enjoying this. I think the only way to possibly enjoy this is to be ok with the fact that they might lose this Series. Be ok with the fact that they are set up to be competitive for the next few years, and if it doesn't happen this year, they might be back here next year. Just like the Royals are back from last year. I just have no idea how to get to that mindset.

d'Kong76 Oct 28 2015 08:18 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Here, drink this! *hands CF some orange kool-aid*

Centerfield Oct 28 2015 08:25 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

You know, if I were the owner of this team, I would issue a press release today to the fan base. It would be me, in a bathrobe, smoking a cigar surrounded by giant mounds of cash. Giant mounds. Everywhere. More than Breaking Bad. More than Scrooge McDuck. And the text of my release would say: "It's ok Mets fans. Enjoy the games. And if we don't win it all this year, I got this. So just relax."

Mets – Willets Point Oct 28 2015 08:25 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Kind of feel like the Mets need to win it this year, because there's so much uncertainty about next year (especially on the offense). The Mets beat the Nats and the Cubs, but if you asked me to prognosticate, I'd see them more likely playing in the postseason next year ahead of the Mets.

Centerfield Oct 28 2015 08:35 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Thanks WP. Way to add more pressure to this. I feel like it's My Cousin Vinny and you just brought up your biological clock.

Ceetar Oct 28 2015 08:37 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: Kind of feel like the Mets need to win it this year, because there's so much uncertainty about next year (especially on the offense). The Mets beat the Nats and the Cubs, but if you asked me to prognosticate, I'd see them more likely playing in the postseason next year ahead of the Mets. See, I don't think so. I think the Mets are still better than the Nats, depending on how the offseason goes (Mets still have some offense to figure out, but the Nats have a lot of question marks too). The Cubs are a good shot to be good, but the division is tougher, and other teams, like the Nats or Giants being better hurts the Wild Card chances too. It's hard to take, but the postseason is tough. I have confidence the Mets will return a few times over the next few years, but even if they're a better team it's not a super high percentage that they never advance this far again. Even if we have a rough week here, we had 7ish months, give or take a few losing streaks, of lots of fun. As hard as it'd be, I'd rather have another 3-4 of those than the Mets win the next four games here and having middling 84 win seasons in 2016-2017

Mets – Willets Point Oct 28 2015 08:42 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I'm still enjoying this and still think the Mets can/will win the World Series, I just can't comfort myself with "we'll be back next year if things go wrong."

Benjamin Grimm Oct 28 2015 08:49 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: I think the only way to possibly enjoy this is to be ok with the fact that they might lose this Series. I just have no idea how to get to that mindset. I don't know, but here's what works for me: I'm aware that what the Mets do isn't really important. It doesn't affect my health, my family, my income, none of that. When the Mets lose, I remind myself of their unimportance compared to the things that really matter. And when they win, I don't do that. After a tough loss, like last night, or Game 2 of the NLDS, I dismiss the Mets as a frivolity and sleep well. After an exhilarating win, like NLDS Games 1 and 5, or NLCS Game 4, I don't temper my joy at all, and end up too charged up to fall asleep for several hours. As I said, this is what works for me. Anyone else's mileage may vary.

themetfairy Oct 28 2015 10:18 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I'm actually in a very calm frame of mind. I'm still grooving on the fact that we're not watching the Dodgers play. Everything after the Mets eliminated them has been creamy, creamy gravy for me. And this is a franchise that has never won Game 1 of a World Series. It's way too early to panic.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 28 2015 12:29 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: I'm still enjoying this and still think the Mets can/will win the World Series, I just can't comfort myself with "we'll be back next year if things go wrong." Maybe not next year. But the year after? Or the year after? During those late innings, I'm a wreck. But, like, a supercharged, happy-pacing wreck. In between, enjoying the gift and riding the melt.

Edgy MD Oct 28 2015 12:39 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I'm exuberant about the present and exuberant about the immediate future.

Mets – Willets Point Oct 28 2015 09:20 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

At this point I'd be content just to see the Mets win a World Series game. No one expected them to get this far, so winning at least one game would be an accomplishment. And I'm not down on the Mets. I don't think they're bad. I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 28 2015 09:23 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Think I may binge-watch a few episodes of The Leftovers, just so I can watch something less depressing than the last 24 hours.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 28 2015 10:34 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable. I don't feel this way. I understand what it means to be down two games to none in a best of seven, and I know that the Mets have been outplayed so far, perhaps badly. But I don't necessarily think this'll automatically carry over to the following games (even though it might). It's just two games. It doesn't wipe out what the Mets, over the past two months or so, have shown they're capable of doing. Momentum is bullshit. Otherwise, the Royals would never lose another game and the Mets would never win another and by now, Cespedes would have already hit 85 homers for the Mets.

Frayed Knot Oct 29 2015 05:51 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Yeah, it's the old: You're never as good as you look when you're winning and you're never as bad as ... (you know the rest)

Lefty Specialist Oct 29 2015 06:40 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

"Momentum is tomorrow's starting pitcher." -Earl Weaver Go Thor.

Centerfield Oct 29 2015 07:56 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: At this point I'd be content just to see the Mets win a World Series game. No one expected them to get this far, so winning at least one game would be an accomplishment. And I'm not down on the Mets. I don't think they're bad. I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable. I think I am falling in somewhere around here. Trying to organize my thoughts/emotions this morning. I hate to say it but I think this series is effectively over. I know it's not impossible to come back from 2-0, but it is much, much harder when the other team is just simply better. I am an idiot and will admit to completely underestimating this Kansas City team. No wonder they beat Toronto. They are amazing. It's like facing a lineup of 8 Keith Hernandez, and then a 9th pesky hitter. I think the Mets will win Game 3. Then the Royals will either win the next two, or take it back to KC and win there. But the series will never really be competitive again. And surprisingly, I think I am ok with this. At least as of now. I would have been furious if the Mets had lost to the Dodgers after that bullshit play. I would have been mad if they lost to a lesser team. But these Royals have beat Harvey, deGrom and Familia. And none of those guys pitched that bad. They just got beat. If the Mets come back and win, I'll be ecstatic. But if Kansas City wins, I just have to tip my cap and call them my daddy. It's ok though. We were hoping this would be 1986, maybe it's 1985. Kansas City wins the World Series. We have to wait one more year for the Mets' world domination.

themetfairy Oct 29 2015 08:00 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: And surprisingly, I think I am ok with this. At least as of now. I would have been furious if the Mets had lost to the Dodgers after that bullshit play. I would have been mad if they lost to a lesser team. But these Royals have beat Harvey, deGrom and Familia. And none of those guys pitched that bad. They just got beat. I'm around here. I have never been so angry after a game as I was after Game 2 of the NLDS. After defeating the Dodgers, everything else has been a beautiful walk in the park.

Centerfield Oct 29 2015 08:03 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

It's crazy. I have never been as angry over a game as I was about Game 2. And I don't remember the last time I relished a victory as much as I did Game 5. And no matter what happens the rest of the way, I will savor that series victory over the fucking Dodgers all winter long.

themetfairy Oct 29 2015 08:05 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: It's crazy. I have never been as angry over a game as I was about Game 2. And I don't remember the last time I relished a victory as much as I did Game 5. And no matter what happens the rest of the way, I will savor that series victory over the fucking Dodgers all winter long. CF and tmf similarity score = 100%

Mets – Willets Point Oct 29 2015 08:29 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Mets – Willets Point wrote: I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable. I don't feel this way. I understand what it means to be down two games to none in a best of seven, and I know that the Mets have been outplayed so far, perhaps badly. But I don't necessarily think this'll automatically carry over to the following games (even though it might). It's just two games. It doesn't wipe out what the Mets, over the past two months or so, have shown they're capable of doing. Momentum is bullshit. Otherwise, the Royals would never lose another game and the Mets would never win another and by now, Cespedes would have already hit 85 homers for the Mets. It's not about momentum, it's about a team that is just clearly the best in baseball this season playing at their peak standing between the Mets and a championship. Get an 0-2 count? No matter they'll get a hit. They have a runner on base and two outs? You're not getting out of the inning without first surrendering a hit and RBI. Or two. Or three. Go into the 9th inning with a lead and your lights out pitcher on the mound? Doesn't matter. The Kansas City Royals are going to score and tie the game and eventually win. On the other the side the pitchers have so thoroughly scouted the Mets batters so that Chris Young becomes Greg Maddux. And if a Mets batter makes good contact the defense is there, perfectly positioned to get the ball and make an out. Every. Damn. Time. The Mets are a great team and they're doing their best. They've just encountered an unstoppable force.

TransMonk Oct 29 2015 08:37 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

The Mets had chances to win Game 1, but flat out got beat during Game 2. I have had the opportunity to watch over 90% of the Mets games this season and it's been rare (if it happened at all) that one team has done so well against the Mets big pitching guns (Harvey, deGrom and Familia) on consecutive nights. This KC team is very good. This series isn't over, but I can't say that the Mets are getting cheated.

Ceetar Oct 29 2015 08:40 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: The Mets are a great team and they're doing their best. They've just encountered an unstoppable force. i'd love to see some pitch f/x breakdowns on deGrom. I know the Harvey results suggested he had a pretty bad game, stuff wise. Niese and Clippard struck guys out, so it's not like it was just the Royals being the Royals. I see the Mets pitching as the unstoppable force and the Royals as the unmovable object. The pitchers have just been stoppable. We'll see tomorrow when Thor, who's the hardest throwing of them all, is still unstoppable how bad the Royals look.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 29 2015 08:53 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets – Willets Point wrote: Mets – Willets Point wrote: I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable. I don't feel this way. I understand what it means to be down two games to none in a best of seven, and I know that the Mets have been outplayed so far, perhaps badly. But I don't necessarily think this'll automatically carry over to the following games (even though it might). It's just two games. It doesn't wipe out what the Mets, over the past two months or so, have shown they're capable of doing. Momentum is bullshit. Otherwise, the Royals would never lose another game and the Mets would never win another and by now, Cespedes would have already hit 85 homers for the Mets. It's not about momentum, it's about a team that is just clearly the best in baseball this season playing at their peak standing between the Mets and a championship. Get an 0-2 count? No matter they'll get a hit. They have a runner on base and two outs? You're not getting out of the inning without first surrendering a hit and RBI. Or two. Or three. Go into the 9th inning with a lead and your lights out pitcher on the mound? Doesn't matter. The Kansas City Royals are going to score and tie the game and eventually win. On the other the side the pitchers have so thoroughly scouted the Mets batters so that Chris Young becomes Greg Maddux. And if a Mets batter makes good contact the defense is there, perfectly positioned to get the ball and make an out. Every. Damn. Time. The Mets are a great team and they're doing their best. They've just encountered an unstoppable force. I don't see it that way. The only thing that's real here to me is that the Mets are down 2 games to none in a best of seven and that's enough of a hole to dig out of. But I don't get this Royals invulnerability thing. They lost 67 times during the regular season. They needed 14 innings to beat the Mets by a single run in the opener -- if that isn't essentially a coin flip, then nothing is. They won a coin flip in game one, that's what the Royals won. You might think otherwise because you can micro-analyze game one for hours on end, breaking the game down into innings, into plays, into pitches, into micro-minutiae and thus, coming up with reasons for the Royals one-run victory that you think are sustainable and repeatable and will impact every other game to the Royals advantage in the same way. You wouldn't analyze an actual coin-flip in that fashion, but two good teams matched up in a single game is a coin flip. This whole series is a series of coin flips. So even if the Royals truly are better, this wouldn't bear out in one or five games. And what is better? Does that mean that every Royals pitcher is better than every Mets pitcher? That the worst Royals hurler is better than the best Mets hurler? That all of a sudden, Syndergaard is no longer the hottest, most electric pitcher on either team over the past few weeks? I don't know how the series will end, but I'm pretty sure every other game will be unique and follow its own individual script .

Edgy MD Oct 29 2015 08:59 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Mets lost by one in Game One in 1986. Lost by six in Game Two. So yeah, that hole is real, that hole is difficult, but it isn't insurmountable. What's interesting to me IS that Clippard and Niese struck guys out. They're not as programmed to pound the strike zone as Harvey, Wheeler, and Colon. And I'm wondering if Syndergaard can adapt a little to what they're doing. Maybe this is the kind of team Zack Wheeler would dominate. Is he available?

Lefty Specialist Oct 29 2015 09:04 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

I kind of fall in the same place. I was OK with winning one series, just to prove they belonged. Once Tejada was fed into the Utley wood chipper, I wanted their collective asses kicked. They did that. The total domination of the Cubs was a complete surprise; I was already in gravy mode. While I want them to win the Series, like Tom Gl@v!ne I won't be devastated if they lose. They already got a lot further than I ever expected them to, even in my most feverish dreams. At this point I just want to avoid embarrassment on the national stage. Take a game at least and show a little fight, Metsies.

Centerfield Oct 29 2015 09:06 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

If Bartolo is ready, I was thinking give him a start in Game 4 with Matz ready in the pen.

d'Kong76 Oct 29 2015 09:25 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Since this is the irrational exuberance thread, I declare that I fully expect the Mets to be looking to go up 3-2 on Sunday evening. Expect the Mets!

Mets – Willets Point Oct 29 2015 09:26 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

d'Kong76 wrote: Since this is the irrational exuberance thread, I declare that I fully expect the Mets to be looking to go up 3-2 on Sunday evening. Expect the Mets! Yay to this!

MFS62 Oct 29 2015 09:32 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Lefty Specialist wrote: At this point I just want to avoid embarrassment on the national stage. Take a game at least and show a little fight, Metsies. I want to avoid it at the office level. I'm surrounded by very virulent YLDBs. One good thing, one of the few people rooting for the Mets is a mean looking 6'2, 300+ pound ex-football player. He's a nice guy, but his brain hasn't let his face know it yet. He'll keep their gloating and smirking in check. But, it won't come to that. The Mets are still going to win this fucker. Nothing is ever easy. Later

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 29 2015 09:46 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance Edited 3 time(s), most recently on Oct 29 2015 09:59 AM

Centerfield wrote: If Bartolo is ready, I was thinking give him a start in Game 4 with Matz ready in the pen. Is Bartolo ready? Are the Republican debates a "straight-talkin'" shitshow? Is Europe getting a collective boner over your microwave burrito? Are the Wilpons half-crooked and half clueless? IS Bartolo ready? Motherfather, he's over in the corner, slouched into a beanbag chair, pants half-zipped, watching a "Rockford Files" rerun, sipping on some pumpkin-spiced toddy while he flips through a Skymall catalog. OF COURSE he's ready. Of course, I'm not sure what purpose Bartolo-as-rotational-changeup serves, exactly-- Velocity curveball? Visual distraction?-- but hell, I'm onboard. And what the hell is all this Royals-are-unbreakable-warriors shit? They're great and balanced and particularly pesky, sure, but they've played, like, one great game and one pretty-good/lucky one. THEY WERE PRACTICALLY TAKEN OUT BY THE ASTROS. Just because Yost has an analytic department and lineup card, doesn't make him f'ING Yoda. We'll kick some ass tomorrow. Or we won't. Whatever. But these guys aren't the fucking be-all end-all. They're Zobrist and a bunch of hot-hitting Ecksteins, and they can get got like any other punks. With all due respect, save the defeatist reckoning for the offseason, when this is all done. In the meantime, there's yelling to do, and your throats are needed. Let's Go.

Mets – Willets Point Oct 29 2015 09:50 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

This is the best sentence ever written: Motherfather, he's over in the corner, slouched into a beanbag chair, pants half-zipped, watching a "Rockford Files" rerun, sipping on some pumpkin-spiced toddy while he flips through a Skymall catalog.

Vic Sage Oct 29 2015 09:55 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Lets go Knicks! Oh, are we still playing baseball? cool.

seawolf17 Oct 29 2015 07:20 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Centerfield wrote: Mets – Willets Point wrote: At this point I'd be content just to see the Mets win a World Series game. No one expected them to get this far, so winning at least one game would be an accomplishment. And I'm not down on the Mets. I don't think they're bad. I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable. I think I am falling in somewhere around here. Trying to organize my thoughts/emotions this morning. I hate to say it but I think this series is effectively over. I know it's not impossible to come back from 2-0, but it is much, much harder when the other team is just simply better. I am an idiot and will admit to completely underestimating this Kansas City team. No wonder they beat Toronto. They are amazing. It's like facing a lineup of 8 Keith Hernandez, and then a 9th pesky hitter. I think the Mets will win Game 3. Then the Royals will either win the next two, or take it back to KC and win there. But the series will never really be competitive again. And surprisingly, I think I am ok with this. At least as of now. I would have been furious if the Mets had lost to the Dodgers after that bullshit play. I would have been mad if they lost to a lesser team. But these Royals have beat Harvey, deGrom and Familia. And none of those guys pitched that bad. They just got beat. If the Mets come back and win, I'll be ecstatic. But if Kansas City wins, I just have to tip my cap and call them my daddy. It's ok though. We were hoping this would be 1986, maybe it's 1985. Kansas City wins the World Series. We have to wait one more year for the Mets' world domination. CF and I are basically the same person sometimes, although I have slightly more confidence in this team to make it interesting in the next two games.

Edgy MD Oct 30 2015 07:49 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

One. Game. At. A. Time. Anything is possible — likely, even — if you can take it step-by-step.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 30 2015 08:01 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

And if this is the last sequence of steps, well, walk hard. Your "Ah, well, they're just better" rock-kicking is not needed here. We are in want of yelling, constant and true. Your throats are needed here. Your rage-against-the-strike-zone is needed here. Your joy in every single; your fist-pump at every "meaningless" nice Wilmer play; your stupid-enthusiastic, who-the-fuck-is-that-guy-clapping-at-ONE-hit clapping. Take a cue from Cubs fans in Game 4-- hell, from the Royals themselves in Game 1-- dust yourselves off and keep going. Because it's baseball, and we're Met fans, and that's what we do. Don't get "pumped," or rather, don't focus on pumped. Pumped dissipates. Pumped flags and sometimes curdles. Instead, just stay. Stay loyal. Stay engaged. Stay loud. Dance. We're gonna dance tonight, and tomorrow, and for as long as there's music, we're gonna keep dancing. Not interested? Not as interested as you used to be? Well, nice having you around-- the door to the parking lot is that way. Those of us who are here are here. We're present. We're gonna dance, and we're gonna dance a lot. LET'S. GO. METS.

Edgy MD Oct 30 2015 08:16 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Bloody fucking yes.

Mets – Willets Point Oct 30 2015 08:41 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Edgy MD wrote: One. Game. At. A. Time. Anything is possible — likely, even — if you can take it step-by-step. Step 1 - Don't get swept. Step 2 - Guarantee that the Royals can't celebrate a championship in Citi Field. Step 3 - Prevent the Royals from winning any games at all in Citi Field. Step 4 - Win a game at Kauffman. Seems simple.

Ceetar Oct 30 2015 08:44 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Step 1: Don't let the Royals get runs. Step 2: Score runs. Step 3: Repeat steps 1 and 2 nine times. Step 4: Repeat steps 1,2 and 3 four times.

Edgy MD Oct 30 2015 08:55 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Step One. Score more runs than the Royals tonight. Step Two. We'll discuss this tomorrow. All available planning and assets focused on Step One.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 30 2015 08:56 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

We'll know so much more after tonight's game. The difference between 0-3 and 1-2 is tremendous. If the Mets lose, they're virtually doomed. And if they win, they're back in it. I'm pretty much taking all of the things I was thinking when the Mets were up 2-0 on the Cubs and looking at it from the other side.

Centerfield Oct 30 2015 11:26 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: And if this is the last sequence of steps, well, walk hard. Your "Ah, well, they're just better" rock-kicking is not needed here. We are in want of yelling, constant and true. Your throats are needed here. Your rage-against-the-strike-zone is needed here. Your joy in every single; your fist-pump at every "meaningless" nice Wilmer play; your stupid-enthusiastic, who-the-fuck-is-that-guy-clapping-at-ONE-hit clapping. Take a cue from Cubs fans in Game 4-- hell, from the Royals themselves in Game 1-- dust yourselves off and keep going. Because it's baseball, and we're Met fans, and that's what we do. Don't get "pumped," or rather, don't focus on pumped. Pumped dissipates. Pumped flags and sometimes curdles. Instead, just stay. Stay loyal. Stay engaged. Stay loud. Dance. We're gonna dance tonight, and tomorrow, and for as long as there's music, we're gonna keep dancing. Not interested? Not as interested as you used to be? Well, nice having you around-- the door to the parking lot is that way. Those of us who are here are here. We're present. We're gonna dance, and we're gonna dance a lot. LET'S. GO. METS. Look, make no mistake of it. I will be there for every second of it. My throat will be hoarse at the end of the night. I will rage. I will cheer. And no matter what happens tonight, I won't be able to sleep for hours after the game. I just don't think they're going to win. Not after what I've seen. I wish I did. I really wish I did. I don't know how to change that.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 30 2015 11:29 AM Re: Irrational Exuberance

You really don't have to change what you think will happen. No matter what you think, events will soon prove you right or wrong.

seawolf17 Oct 30 2015 02:47 PM Re: Irrational Exuberance

Ceetar wrote: Step 1: Don't let the Royals get runs. Step 2: Score runs. Step 3: Repeat steps 1 and 2 nine times. Step 4: Repeat steps 1,2 and 3 four times. "Great insight, Cal. Back to you, Ronnie."