Master Index of Archived Threads


Stepping back from the ledge...maybe.

Vince Coleman Firecracker Jun 12 2008 07:15 PM

Is this team doomed, or have they just run into a streak of bad luck in close games lately? Obviously, the bullpen's been coughing up leads and there have been a ton of runners left on base lately, but is it possible both of those things are just happening now as an unlucky coincidence? A little bit of bad luck can go a long way when both your corner outfielders are out of the lineup (for which Minaya is, doubtless, partially responsible.) But isn't this team just a break or two away from not being anywhere near the chasm of oblivion I feel they're looking into now? I mean, if either Wright's or Beltran' line drives get through the infield, we feel positive about this team's resiliency and ability to pick each other up, etc, etc. Um, this post is just me rambling. This lost hurt, badly. I'm just trying to gauge whether or not I'm overreacting to an emotional week of games when I feel this team won't win more than 85 games this year.

metirish Jun 12 2008 07:18 PM

I wish it were only a run of bad luck and bad games but it's been going on for a year , the pen the last seven games are 1 and 5 with six home runs and a plus seven ERA , and the hitters are just not hitting a whole lot. This team is not a good team.

Vince Coleman Firecracker Jun 12 2008 07:29 PM

Yeah, you're right. Back to the ledge for me!

Willets Point Jun 12 2008 07:53 PM

The team's not doomed, but I'm not going to bang my head against the wall to convince anyone otherwise. I'll just enjoy the season best I can.

seawolf17 Jun 12 2008 08:37 PM

This team ain't winning 85 games. (Unless you include spring training.)

Rockin' Doc Jun 12 2008 08:55 PM

The 2008 Mets aren't doomed or unlucky, they simply aren't very good.

AG/DC Jun 12 2008 10:39 PM

You think we could somehow sneak spring training wins into the standings?

G-Fafif Jun 13 2008 12:13 AM

AG/DC wrote: You think we could somehow sneak spring training wins into the standings? Count contests in Florida that all agreed in advance would have no bearing on the official standings? It didn't work for the Clinton campaign...

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 13 2008 07:23 AM

I'm not sure I disagree with the first comment that much. I mean our offense & pitching in whatever situation is only as good as the O&P overall -- and that's pretty much second division right now.

soupcan Jun 13 2008 08:20 AM

In the 10 games prior to the sweep in San Diego, the Mets were 7-3. The losses in San Diego were 2-1, 2-1, 2-1 and 8-6. A 2-1 game can arguably be said to have gone either way with a break here or there and the 8-6 loss was all Wags. Let's say the Mets get a break at least once in the first three games in SD and win one of those games. If Wags doesn't groove one to Clark, maybe the Mets come out of San Diego 2-2 in those 4 games. They come home and blow a 5-1 lead, recover in time to win the next game 6-4 after Wagner gives up another 3 run homer. They lose yesterday, again solely because the closer can't shut the door. So - if Wagner just does his job the Mets are not 1-6 since going to San Diego, but could very well be 5-2 or at least 4-3 which coupled with the 7-3 of those previous 10 would give them a 12-5 or a 11-6 record in the past 17 games. I guess I'm saying that the team as a whole is playing well enough to win but the bullpen - Wagner especially - is just pathetic. We can bitch about the offense and misplays and bad luck but the truth is if the bullpen can just do their job, none of us here are jumping off bridges. I read it one thread here in the past week that these Mets are playing like last September's Mets and I agree. They are scoring, getting leads and blowing leads. The difference is that the starting pitching has been fine, its the late inning bullpen that is simply killing them.

metirish Jun 13 2008 08:29 AM

Wright says it's all down to cahnfidence and that the team has lost it's swagger. If Wagner holds the last three games the team is a game over and not three games down , a .500 team like we have been all the last year.

soupcan Jun 13 2008 08:33 AM

="metirish"]Wright says it's all down to cahnfidence and that the team has lost it's swagger. I disagree with Young David. It's all down to pitching and the team has lost its bullpen

AG/DC Jun 13 2008 08:42 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 13 2008 08:43 AM

Soupy's got a point, but what are you going to do in 2008 without a bullpen? I mean, one perfectly valid proposal is to trade the lot of them for spare parts and bench players and to promote a bullpen of Carlos Muniz, Tony Armas, Willie Collazo, Tim McNab, Brandon Knight, Ruddy Lugo, Eddie Camach, Eddie Kunz, Sal Aguilar, and Eude Brito. Could Willie manage them any better?

Frayed Knot Jun 13 2008 08:43 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 13 2008 08:45 AM

This WEEK is on the bullpen - Wagner mostly, although hardly exclusively - but the season is not.

soupcan Jun 13 2008 08:44 AM

I think they just have to ride it out.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 13 2008 08:45 AM

It's what they do.

metirish Jun 13 2008 08:47 AM

Yeah this week the pen blows but it was a relative strength , the offense is not that good and whatever stat measures tack on runs and whatever stat measures blowing a game wide open then I would bet the Mets have bad stats in both categories.

soupcan Jun 13 2008 08:51 AM

Frayed Knot wrote: This WEEK is on the bullpen - Wagner mostly, although hardly exclusively - but the season is not. Absolutely, but they were 30-28 going into San Diego. If they are just 4-3 since then the record is 34-31. Instead of 7 & 1/2 behind the Phils and fading fast they could be 4 & 1/2 back and rolling.

Vic Sage Jun 13 2008 09:15 AM

sure, we could've won a few more if the bullpen hadn't imploded last week. so, instead of being a few games under .500, we'd be a few games over .500. The fact is, we're a .500 or so team, and have been for over a full season now. We've lost games because of every element of this team... they've failed to hit with RISP, they've had inconsistent starters, often going less than 6 innings p/gm, they've had base-running mistakes and errors at inopportune times, and bad luck. But luck is the residue of design, for good or ill. And bad teams don't hit enough when the pitching implodes, and don't pitch well enough when the bats go cold. It's rarely 1 thing. Right now, the BP sucks. But i can assure you wagner will straighten himself out. But when he does, will our RFer have regained his senses? Who will play LF and hits 6th? How much longer do we let Delgado drag down the lineup? How do we win relying on a rookie, a damaged vet and a head case in the rotation? Do Heilman and Sanchez ever regain their form? There are too many question marks and not enough answers for this team to be better than mediocre this year.

seawolf17 Jun 13 2008 09:24 AM

metirish wrote: Wright says it's all down to cahnfidence and that the team has lost it's swagger. Don't you have to not suck first before you can have swagger? Cahnfidence ain't it. I have plenty of confidence in this team -- confidence that they're mediocre at best. And that's okay; you can't win every year. Things happen.

Vince Coleman Firecracker Jun 13 2008 10:06 AM

One of my thoughts after yesterday's game was that this team has lost a bunch of really close games in the last week, and really close games tend to even out over a large enough sample size. Had they been a little luckier over the last 7 games, they might have been 3-4 or even 4-3 instead of 1-6. Of course, that wouldn't mean much of a difference in the team's record, but it would certainly feel a lot better. This team is a .500ish team, but even .500ish teams or teams with .500ish run differentials can get lucky and make a run (see: 2006 Cardinals, 1973 Mets), but this team just doesn't seem to have anything like that in them.

themetfairy Jun 13 2008 11:23 AM

metirish wrote: Wright says it's all down to cahnfidence and that the team has lost it's swagger. He sounds like me when I'm talking to kids on the Little League team. I'm constantly telling this one boy that he needs to show some swagger. One would hope that the Mets don't need Little Leaguer pep talks...

soupcan Jun 13 2008 11:32 AM

Vic Sage wrote: The fact is, we're a .500 or so team, and have been for over a full season now. We've lost games because of every element of this team... There are too many question marks and not enough answers for this team to be better than mediocre this year. You know what - Vic's right. Too much has gone/is going wrong. You are what your record says you are.

Mendoza Line Jun 13 2008 03:43 PM

I want to think that the Mets still have a shot - that Pelfrey's hit his stride, that the bullpen failures are a minor blip, that once Church and Alou rejoin the lineup the Mets will start scoring like A Boy Named Seo on a trip to New Orleans, and that in the end, the Mets will be the team they were advertised to be in 2008. But, as Vic notes, it's not just one thing - it's a little of everything, and a whole lot of pieces have to come together just right for this season to be salvageable. It's reasonable to count on some good things happening - like Church recovering quickly, Alou managing another 175 ABs, Pelfrey winning 10 more games, or Delgado (who's started to hit a little) managing to improve to a point where he's a shadow of his former self. It's just not reasonable to count on ALL of these things happening. And the '73 Mets had the benefits of a weak division...that ain't happening this year. So I'm firmly on the ledge until proven otherwise. If the Mets aren't over .500 and within 5 games of first place (not the wild card - first place) at the All Star Break, I'm all in favor of trading veterans to teams that are contending and willing to overpay for same. Oh, yeah - HAIL.