Master Index of Archived Threads


Mythbusters

Edgy MD Dec 03 2019 10:26 PM

What is the Mets' myth that you really want to crush? I foolishly got into it with two guys over the notion that the Mets failed to win a championship after 1986 is because they didn't sign Ray Knight. Like President trump, the notion doesn't have a single virtue to recommend it, and yet its defenders are legion and they are passionate.

G-Fafif Dec 03 2019 11:29 PM Re: Mythbusters

The Mets are a counterfactual dynasty.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 04 2019 12:19 AM Re: Mythbusters

Gary Carter was the last piece to the puzzle.

MFS62 Dec 04 2019 06:17 AM Re: Mythbusters

Don Hahn was the" next Willie Mays".* Later * = sorry, Hahn Solo

Frayed Knot Dec 04 2019 06:21 AM Re: Mythbusters

ARod would have signed with the Mets in 200/2001 for a deep discount (some opinions posited around half) compared to what he eventually got from Texas. Much of this shit was based on his (slight) NYC roots (born there, grew up largely in the DR) and his self-proclaimed boyhood Keith Hernandez fandom which he'd conveniently drop in to conversations whenever he wanted to stir the pot - as if those factors have ANY historical basis on why players make their FA choices. That he often spun the same tale about Dale Murphy (the Braves, via TBS, were the only games he could watch from the DR, and it was the reason he wore #3 in his career) gets ignored as does his stated goal to not just maximize his contract but set records in doing so (the $252 mil total was purposely chosen so as to be DOUBLE that of the recently signed Kevin Garnet in the NBA). With Carter the argument is largely the shading between him being A final piece of the puzzle vs THE final piece. That he was the final BIG move made in the winter of '84-'85 and went on to have two top-flight seasons while handling the young pitching staff as the team jumped from 90 regular season wins to 98 and then 108 makes a good argument for the 'The' side. That there are those who black out from their memories that what followed were three increasingly lame seasons after the championship doesn't change that. The Knight argument, on the other hand, always bugged me; wasn't true then, isn't true now. After being the backup more often than not in '85 (and not real well liked by fans) Ray had a nice season in '86 [12th best WAR on the team] and even that was largely based on a hot April & May [1078 & 857 OPS'es vs 704, 577, 741, 801 the remaining months]. The WS MVP was an added bonus although that was more a case where there was no single outstanding player so his 9-for-23 (7 singles) was deemed the best candidate. Fine, no problem there. But it's like it either never occurred to the Knight worshipers that Ray was: a) 34 y/o in '87; b) went on to have OPS+ seasons of 83 & 53; c) was out of the game after that, or that we had HoJo manning his position [OPS+ of 133 & 124 in '87-'88] or they somehow believe that his decline would have magically been forestalled had he remained in NYC. There's a more or less parallel Darryl Strawberry line of logic which ignores that he essentially had ONE good season as a full-time player after leaving the Mets. Hell, he only had one full-time season post-NYM (his first LAD season was his only one to top 300 ABs). But it's always fun to pretend that the injuries, age, drug abuse, illnesses, attitude problems, and erratic behavior wouldn't have happened if only he, like Knight, had had the good sense to 'stay home'.

MFS62 Dec 04 2019 06:28 AM Re: Mythbusters

Does the "he wanted his own tent in Spring Training, so the Mets didn't sign him" story, count as part of the A-Rod myth? Later

batmagadanleadoff Dec 04 2019 06:34 AM Re: Mythbusters

Don Hahn was the" next Willie Mays" I don't recall anyone ever claiming this, let alone this having any kind of traction to qualify as "myth". And if I'm wrong about this, well then this "myth" doesn't need any busting.

MFS62 Dec 04 2019 06:45 AM Re: Mythbusters

That was what the Mets front office said when they got him. (As Casey Stengel used to say, "You could look it up") My tongue was firmly in cheek. Later

kcmets Dec 04 2019 06:55 AM Re: Mythbusters

Gregg Jefferies could hit baseballs under water.

41Forever Dec 04 2019 07:04 AM Re: Mythbusters

Pete Alonso would be brutally bad on defense.

Ceetar Dec 04 2019 07:27 AM Re: Mythbusters

=41Forever post_id=27497 time=1575468288 user_id=69] Pete Alonso would be brutally bad on defense.

depends on how you define brutally I guess.



he was one of the worst defensive first basemen and now no one wants to talk about it. Get the DH and put Smith there and the Mets might be very well off.

Edgy MD Dec 04 2019 07:37 AM Re: Mythbusters

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=27478 time=1575443950 user_id=68] Gary Carter was the last piece to the puzzle.

Yeah, it isn't hard to construct a timeline of success where the Mets flourish with Hubie Brooks hitting in the middle of their lineup instead of Carter, and Mike Fitzgerald, Herm Winningham and Floyd Youmans around to help as well.



The only problem there is Brooks getting hurt for the second half of 1986, but that's nearly impossible to anticipate. But certainly puzzles can be constructed a lot of ways.

stevejrogers Dec 04 2019 08:24 AM Re: Mythbusters

I've usually seen Mitchell added with Knight in post-1986 myth. Ignoring that he was sent to SF during the year, and he still didn't put it all together until 1989 for his OYW MVP.

Edgy MD Dec 04 2019 08:26 AM Re: Mythbusters

The Myth of Mitchell has multiple volumes. Facts are there, but much of it is underpinned by a convoluted narrative that cannot find its way home to any documented account.

stevejrogers Dec 04 2019 08:28 AM Re: Mythbusters

Murphy is the Knight/Mitchell of the 2015 NL Champions.

Centerfield Dec 04 2019 08:53 AM Re: Mythbusters

Armando Benitez was a bad pitcher.

Frayed Knot Dec 04 2019 08:54 AM Re: Mythbusters

=stevejrogers post_id=27508 time=1575473326 user_id=57] Murphy is the Knight/Mitchell of the 2015 NL Champions.

Except that Muffy was 30 when he left the Mets, had one near-MVP season w/Washington (2nd in 2016) plus one more real good one (19th MVP) before injuries and age started to catch up to him - and

even then he was still at least average-ish for two more years, at least when he could stay on the field. But Knight was much closer to dregs-of-the-league kind of stuff after leaving Queens while the

argument that he was the missing piece in '87 and beyond assumes he would have been exactly the opposite. Either that or maybe it's that he would have been able to produce some kind of Jeter-like

influence on the rest of the team which would have made everyone around him better even as he himself was the personification of a giant suck machine.

Frayed Knot Dec 04 2019 09:12 AM Re: Mythbusters

Does the "he wanted his own tent in Spring Training, so the Mets didn't sign him" story, count as part of the A-Rod myth? That Arod/Boras wanted a whole separate marketing arm to go along with the contract has been confirmed over the years by multiple sources from other clubs who were in on various ARod negotiations and also later on by Boras himself (to Francesa IIRC). And I think it's reasonable to assume that that was all A factor in them not signing him or at least in them getting out as early as they did, that they realized that what it was going to take to sign him was more than they thought was wise to invest in 1/25th of your roster. And, as things turned out, the team that did sign him wanted out of it before the contract was 1/3 of the way done and paid multi-millions more just to make it go away. The two teams that were most in on trade talks, even though the two richest in baseball, wanted multi-millions in relief before they'd take on the remainder (you may recall that the BoSox wanted more relief than the MLBPA deemed was fair and so they dropped out). And the team that wound up with him had to then re-buy him on the open market four years later when he opted-out of the deal. Now one could argue that the '24-and-1' deal was a convenient excuse to get out of the negotiation they weren't up to in the first place. But when presented with all the facts of how the life of that deal went down, the come-back argument that: 'Well he had Keith Hernandez footie pajamas as a kid so he would have signed with us for half as much' defies both logic and basic intelligence.

Ceetar Dec 04 2019 09:18 AM Re: Mythbusters

With A-Rod, i do think if the Mets had gone hot and heavy at him, right out of the gate, they probably can net him for a _little_ less than what he got. also he was worth ~8 more wins than Rey Ordonez and the Mets finished 6 back in the division.

kcmets Dec 04 2019 09:26 AM Re: Mythbusters

Rey Ordoñez had a chronic gambling problem, bet against the Mets and threw away countless AB's to help throw games on purpose for financial gain. No, really!!

Edgy MD Dec 04 2019 09:34 AM Re: Mythbusters

=Centerfield post_id=27514 time=1575474812 user_id=65] Armando Benitez was a bad pitcher.

Jesus, yes.

Edgy MD Dec 04 2019 09:36 AM Re: Mythbusters

=Ceetar post_id=27520 time=1575476338 user_id=102] With A-Rod, i do think if the Mets had gone hot and heavy at him, right out of the gate, they probably can net him for a _little_ less than what he got.

Ewww ...

41Forever Dec 04 2019 10:10 AM Re: Mythbusters

That Clemens wasn't aiming at Mike Piazza with the broken bat.

Johnny Lunchbucket Dec 04 2019 10:42 AM Re: Mythbusters

"Sandy Alderson was a tool of the Wilpons" Granted this statement is made by only the most ignorant of fans but loudly and often enough to gain it some currency. Everyone forgets Sandy was foisted upon the Wilpons and that as soon as they got their alleged financial footing back they couldn't wait to throw him overboard.

Centerfield Dec 04 2019 11:09 AM Re: Mythbusters

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: "Sandy Alderson was a tool of the Wilpons" Granted this statement is made by only the most ignorant of fans but loudly and often enough to gain it some currency. Everyone forgets Sandy was foisted upon the Wilpons and that as soon as they got their alleged financial footing back they couldn't wait to throw him overboard. Correction. Throw him under the bus, then throw him overboard.

Frayed Knot Dec 04 2019 11:20 AM Re: Mythbusters

=Centerfield post_id=27514 time=1575474812 user_id=65] Armando Benitez was a bad pitcher.

Gary is one of those who buys into the -- 'He was fine right up until the calendar changed to September' -- mode and repeats it often for Keith and Ron's benefit (neither of whom was paying any attention in that era) as if it's an unchallenged, and unchallengeable, fact.

It pisses me off whenever I hear it both because Gary should be better than that and because, even if you want to emphasize Armando's drawbacks, the issue was, at minimum, a lot more nuanced.

Ceetar Dec 04 2019 01:46 PM Re: Mythbusters

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: "Sandy Alderson was a tool of the Wilpons" Granted this statement is made by only the most ignorant of fans but loudly and often enough to gain it some currency. Everyone forgets Sandy was foisted upon the Wilpons and that as soon as they got their alleged financial footing back they couldn't wait to throw him overboard. That he was foisted on the Mets in the first place.

Edgy MD Dec 04 2019 05:40 PM Re: Mythbusters

Dueling myths!

RealityChuck Dec 04 2019 06:25 PM Re: Mythbusters

Don Hahn was the" next Willie Mays".* Later * = sorry, Hahn Solo No, you're thinking of Don Bosch.

MFS62 Dec 04 2019 07:01 PM Re: Mythbusters

Don Hahn was the" next Willie Mays".* Later * = sorry, Hahn Solo No, you're thinking of Don Bosch. Yes. I stand corrected. Hahn was a better player than Bosch by about 150 points of Mets OPS. Then again Hahn's grandma was probably better than Bosch. Later

RealityChuck Dec 04 2019 08:22 PM Re: Mythbusters

Bosch said from the first that Cardwell was going to be the better part of the deal. I'll go with the big one: the Nolan Ryan trade was a bad one. If you look at Ryan's record, he was a stinko pitcher that year, and his numbers each year declined, going from a WHIP of 1.254 to 1.586 and increasing each year. He was especially bad during the second half of the season, with a 7.74 ERA. The conclusion was that he would never make it big, and he wasn't even the important element in the deal: the Angels would have accepted Jim McAndrew, whose WHIP that year was 1.218. The Mets chose Ryan (McAndrew even had a better WHIP the next year than Ryan). OTOH, Fregosi was a multiple all star and all contemporary accounts of the deal thought the Mets had won it. Alas, Ryan immediately turned it around and Fregosi kept getting injured. So I disagree that it was a bad deal. It was a good deal at the time that didn't work out.