|
Interesting article from Klapisch(I know that's hard to believe), I could have put this in the all purpose thread but thought it might warrant a new one...
]
By BOB KLAPISCH
SPORTS COLUMNIST
PHILADELPHIA -- Ask an '86 Met what it's like to watch his 2006 descendants, and it's like examining a genealogy tree. That's us, is what the retro Mets must be thinking, as this year's squad has taken a 7½ game lead in the East, ready to use the summer as calisthenics for the playoffs.
Of course, you'll never get Willie Randolph to admit his Mets have become rulers of the National League, if not the baseball universe. He's too smart to start coasting now, especially after watching Tom Glavine give up four home runs to the Phillies on Tuesday night in Citizens Bank Park.
Granted, the Phillies' home field is an incubator for missile launches, but seeing Glavine get knocked out in the fifth inning -- breaking his streak of making it to the sixth inning in 27 consecutive games -- strengthens Randolph's belief that nothing is guaranteed over the course of a long season.
The manager uses the Yankees' near collapse in 2000 -- they almost blew the nine-game lead they held on Sept. 13 -- as proof that pennant races are never won in June.
Still, the Mets don't seem to have any competition in the division, proving in a 9-7 win how much quicker and more athletic they are than the second-place Phillies. David Wright's full-stretch dive of Pat Burrell's one-hop smash in the ninth inning, not only saved Billy Wagner from an embarrassing meltdown in front of his former fans (who are now his sworn enemies), but may have ended the race altogether.
The Phillies would be wise to start thinking of a wild-card spot. The Braves are 11 out and legally dead. The rest of the division is irrelevant. The West is soft, almost invisible, and the Cardinals, once regarded as the NL's premier product, look sluggish with Albert Pujols on the disabled list indefinitely.
Is it possible that the only measuring stick for the Mets ... is the Mets?
What would happen, then, in a seven-game war of the Met worlds, 1986 versus 2006?
The answer is obvious enough, at least if you ask Ron Darling and Keith Hernandez. They won't actually say the '86 team would prevail, but a suppressed, knowing smile spoke volumes.
"Well, I'd like our five [starters] against anybody," Hernandez said. A moment later, Darling drifted over to the conversation and was even more candid.
"Who [among the 2006 Mets] would've hit Dwight?" he asked. "No one did for two years, so why would these guys be any different?"
Naturally, the two former stars were quick to temper their remarks. They are, after all employees of the team, and it's part of their job as broadcasters to mingle with the very players they're critiquing.
So it's no surprise to hear Darling and Hernandez praise the 2006 team, even if they privately believe the Mets are slaughtering a watered-down National League. Still, that doesn't change the fact that the Mets are loose and happy and happen to like each other. In that sense they're strikingly similar to the '86 team.
"Actually, they're probably more mature than we were," Darling said with a laugh. "I think this team reflects the personality of the manager, and Willie is a humble guy, very business-like.
"Davey [Johnson] was crazed, exactly the opposite. I guess you could say that was us, crazed."
Hernandez likes the depth of the current Mets' bench, which makes him remember Danny Heep and Ed Hearn, as well as the Wally Backman-Tim Teufel platoon, and Mookie Wilson and Lenny Dykstra in center, too.
The key difference, then? It's like Darling says, pitching. Who would you pick to win a game with Armageddon looming -- Gooden or Pedro Martinez?
Asked for a point-blank answer, Hernandez said, "Well, are you asking me if we could hit Pedro today or Pedro in his prime?"
Pedro in his prime, was the answer.
"Well, no, but no one could hit him," Hernandez said. "But if we faced Pedro today, I think it would've been interesting."
Same question went to the No. 2 starter: Darling versus Tom Glavine.
"Depends if you're talking about a 26-year-old Glavine or Glavine as a 40 year old," Darling said. His point? None of today's Met pitchers are in their prime, whereas most of them were just peaking in 1986.
Either way, it makes for a delicious debate, and it might be the only fun the Mets have between now and October. The coming months already reek of anticlimax, which is why Randolph is doing his best to keep the Mets focused.
There are issues that will require his attention. Deciding what to do with Lastings Milledge is one. Sealing off the back end of the rotation is another. It may be that Alay Soler has won the No. 4 spot outright, but no one's sure how long Orlando Hernandez stays healthy.
And then there's the matter of October poise, which the Mets may or may not have. Not even Randolph can guarantee his core players will remain composed in the playoffs, not until the Mets finally get there.
The history books are rife with regular-season empires crumbling in the October promise land. The Mets themselves bear the ugly wounds of collapse. As much as Darling and Hernandez love to talk about 1986, the conversation turns dark at the mere mention of 1988.
Remembering that seven-game loss to the Dodgers in the League Championship Series, Darling mumbled something primal. It sounded like "ugh." That was another way of saying: Don't even go there.
E-mail: klapisch@northjersey.com
|
|
