Forum Home

Master Index of Archived Threads


Mets players blueprint for the rest of the season

metirish
Jun 11 2008 06:39 AM

I just find this funny , straight out of Major League.



]




Few grand plans have gotten off to a worse start than the Mets' new one did Tuesday night.

They haven't played like a playoff team, but the Mets still believe they are one. And Tuesday, before facing the Diamondbacks, the Mets players emerged from a brief players-only, closed-door meeting, each carrying a piece of paper with a blueprint for a future that includes the postseason.

No part of it included blowing a four-run lead and falling, 9-5, at Shea. Reliever Joe Smith surrendered a a go-ahead solo homer to Chris Snyder in the eighth and Duaner Sanchez coughed up three more runs in the ninth to complete the Mets' undoing.

One player allowed the Daily News a quick glance at the sheet, which looked a lot like a flow chart with a series of arrows. At the top was the team's record entering Tuesday night's game, 30-32. Near the bottom was a circled final regular-season record of 92-70.

Below that was an arrow pointing to a single word: "Playoffs."

The sheet also had several phrases and motivational messages. One said "We B4 I." Another read "team above self." A third message was "we have time."

Players asked about the meeting said the only matter discussed was players' union business, the reelection of Aaron Heilman as team representative. One who was asked about the sheet he held said, "It's a team matter. I'm not talking about it."

The Mets players seemed focused when they came out of their meeting and during the first innings of the game. Moises Alou returned from the DL and had a two-run single in a three-run first. David Wright had a two-run homer to make it 5-1 in the second. And John Maine was pitching well into the fifth.

It came undone quickly. Maine gave up a two-run homer before getting out of the fifth having thrown 101 pitches, and Claudio Vargas allowed a two-run single that tied it. After a 61-minute delay for a storm, during which Billy Wagner and Scott Schoeneweis helped the grounds crew secure the tarp, came the late-inning meltdown.

The D-Backs, who had lost 14 of 20 and prompted Mets manager Willie Randolph to say, "We're hoping they stay down for awhile and we can fatten up a little bit," hung a fifth straight loss on the staggering Mets.

"This is obviously a trying time for us," Wright said. "We have to get through it, keep our heads up and keep some positivity. Guys are hanging their heads.

"We need to dig down deep and make a stand. It won't take a week. It won't take a month. We have to do it over the next 99 games."

The Mets' program isn't exactly the one out of the comedy "Major League," a film in which a fictionalized version of the Indians mapped out a plot to win 32 games and make the playoffs. There is no villainous owner such as Rachel Phelps who the team is looking to expose with every win.

The Mets' plan to play .620 ball over the season's final 100 games is ambitious. It's a better clip than either the 2007 Rockies or Phillies, two of MLB's hottest finishers last season. And they are the only villains so far in this story, having played far below their potential.

"I still think this is going to be a good team," GM Omar Minaya said. "You can't allow yourself to succumb to the negativity that comes with what happened last year and the bad start this year....It's a mental test."

Alou gave no specifics about the team meeting when asked earlier about it but said, "Nobody's happy with what's going on here, but nobody has given up....We've got 100games left. A hundred games is a lot, so we have time to get our act together."

The Mets need to pick up the pace on that. There are only 99 left now.





Methead
Jun 11 2008 07:33 AM

Hmm.

I'd rather hear them say they're not thinking about anything beyond winning the very next game. I don't see a benefit in telling your team they have to play .620 ball to have a shot, even if it's the truth.

AG/DC
Jun 11 2008 08:03 AM

We'll see.

My blueprint is Bullpen Stability + Tack-On Runs - Sacrifice Bunts = Better Team.

It's psychological warfare. I'm starting to really appreciate how playing for one run and to prevent one run --- playing to not lose --- is mentally exhausting.

Benjamin Grimm
Jun 11 2008 08:20 AM

On the SNY pregame show yesterday, Harold Reynolds was saying that he'd switch Reyes and Castillo in the batting order. I think his reason was that Reyes would get more pitches to hit if Castillo was on base ahead of him.

Sounds reasonable. I like the idea for a different reason: Castillo would almost never be at bat with a runner on base and nobody out. (Unless the pitcher got a leadoff walk or single or something.) That would lead to far fewer sacrifice bunt attempts by Castillo.

Benjamin Grimm
Jun 11 2008 08:21 AM

Oh, and Lee Mazzilli then said that he wouldn't move Reyes to the second hole.

If the new manager comes down to a choice between Harold Reynolds and Lee Mazzilli, I'd pick Reynolds.

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jun 11 2008 08:25 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 11 2008 08:26 AM

I completely agree with Edgy's blueprint. They play so wussily.

I'd also like to see them try Castillo first but you know they're scared of making it look like they're embarrassing Reyes.

sharpie
Jun 11 2008 08:25 AM

If the new manager comes down to a choice between some guy down on the street and Lee Mazzilli I'm going with the guy on the street.

AG/DC
Jun 11 2008 08:32 AM

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:
I'd also like to see them try Castillo first but you know they're scared of making it look like they're embarrassing Reyes.


This is so fucking true, they're probably going to have you killed for posting it.

Desperate as they are, they still might try it, but maybe not until it's too late. He could be an Alfonzian force out of the two-hole.

batmagadanleadoff
Jun 11 2008 09:27 AM

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:
I'd also like to see them try Castillo first but you know they're scared of making it look like they're embarrassing Reyes.


I think this is a great idea; especially the way Reyes and Castillo have been playing this season. Another obstacle to this plan other than the one you already mentioned is that Randolph's philosophy is to use the #2 batter as an outmaker, a sac bunter. And under this strategy, misguided as it is, Randolph would never waste Reyes' at bats on sac bunts.

Benjamin Grimm
Jun 11 2008 09:31 AM

Which is exactly the reason it would be a great move: fewer sacrifice bunts.

I'm sure Randolph wouldn't see it that way, but hopefully he'll be fired soon.

batmagadanleadoff
Jun 11 2008 09:33 AM
Re: Mets players blueprint for the rest of the season

]One player allowed the Daily News a quick glance at the sheet, which looked a lot like a flow chart with a series of arrows. At the top was the team's record entering Tuesday night's game, 30-32. Near the bottom was a circled final regular-season record of 92-70.

Below that was an arrow pointing to a single word: "Playoffs."

The sheet also had several phrases and motivational messages. One said "We B4 I." Another read "team above self." A third message was "we have time."



For the same amount of ink, my blueprint would have the Mets winning all of the rest of their games. Why stop at 92? I'd make it airtight by throwing in an edict banning any other NL East team from winning more regular season games than the Mets. I'd also make all of Luis Castillo's bunts travel over the fence for a Home Run as if the baseball had some flubber or something.

metirish
Jun 11 2008 09:41 AM

]

We B4 I



Unnamed sources say Omar wrote that .


.620 baseball the rest of the way , I can't wait.

Benjamin Grimm
Jun 11 2008 09:44 AM

Well, yesterday's loss means they'll have to play .626 to get to 92 wins. (And who says 92 will be enough.)

What's discouraging is that they have to play at a .626 pace to get to only 92 wins. (92-70 is a .568 winning percentage.)

AG/DC
Jun 11 2008 10:17 AM

Darryl says Chemistry + Consistency + Getting Things Rolling + Clicking + Different Personalitites = Championship.

metsguyinmichigan
Jun 11 2008 11:02 AM

The problem I see with Castillo ahead of Reyes -- can he still run? Do you want a guy with no knees clogging the bases before your fastest runner?

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jun 11 2008 11:07 AM

He can run fine. Having better success stealing than Reyes btw.

AG/DC
Jun 11 2008 11:09 AM

He's fast enough to stay out of the way of the guy behind him.

Plus, I'd like to add a formula to my blueprint

Castillo/Reyes - Basestealing Oppotunities > Castillo/Reyes + Sacrifice Outs

Rockin' Doc
Jun 11 2008 11:16 AM

The Mets need to stop giving up outs and playing for single runs and instead start playing aggressively for the big inning. They need to stop playing to win and start playing to kick the opponents ass. This team has lost it's swagger and shows no signs of getting it back. Sac bunting and playing for single runs is not going to get the swagger back, even if it leads to wins (which it hasn't for the past year basically).

Centerfield
Jun 11 2008 11:17 AM

I hate sacrifice bunts too, but let's not pretend that the Mets' struggles this year are because of our propensity to bunt (although it certainly doesn't help). We suck because we rank 13th out of 16 teams in OPS.

If we want to win games, we're just going to have to hit better.

AG/DC
Jun 11 2008 11:24 AM

Oh, I think playing for one run is hurting the overall OPS --- not just in a psychobabbly think-small/be-small way, although I don't think that's baseless --- but in a law-of-unintended-consequences way.

AG/DC
Jun 11 2008 11:27 AM

I think the Mets' playing for one run hurts the OPS, the GPS, the GPO, the GNP, and a handful of NGOs we've never heard of.

Centerfield
Jun 11 2008 11:32 AM

Maybe, but even so, where would we be with an aggressive attitude? 11th? Even 10th? We still don't even sniff the upper half.

We're in the bottom half in terms of ERA as well (9th). Good teams tend to be good at stuff like hitting and pitching.

AG/DC
Jun 11 2008 11:38 AM

Well, it's no secret that they're a losing team, with disappointing performance. The question is what approach would improve performance. I think the bullpen was so bolluxed last September, they were desperate, and they seem that way now.

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jun 11 2008 11:52 AM

I think the no-talent thing is also an issue, but not necessarily a separate one. I mean, last night they bunted Schneid so as to set up Endy F. Chavez and his .250 OBP. They wanted us to get excited now that they'd reactivated Marlon Anderson, who is making outs at better than .800 pace. No bench player, but for Castro & Pagan, have an OBP of .300.

Schneider is as bad as I'd feared offensively -- he has 4 extra base hits all year. Considering we have 2 or 3 of the above-mentioned suckas in the lineup everyday, and a bullpen/starting staff that tends to make games close, it's no surprise we're playing like we're always about to lose.

metirish
Jun 11 2008 12:05 PM

]

Nothing has changed from what we spoke about two weeks ago



So spoke Minaya when asked about Willie's job status , this was after leaving a long meeting with Willie , Peterson , Conti and Barnazard after the game last night.

Exactly, nothing has changed.

Rockin' Doc
Jun 11 2008 03:09 PM

Well, Omar's right on that count. The Mets were a sub-.500 team two weeks ago and they are a sub-.500 team now. They were listless and losing most of the close games then, and they're still listless and losing most of the close games. Nothing has really changed over the past two weeks.