Life in the Age of Discovery

FLUSHING (FAF) — Scientists anxiously monitoring activities at the Flushing Meadows National Laboratory expressed amazement Friday night at the discovery of yet another way for the New York Mets to lose a baseball game, this time by blowing a sizable eighth-inning lead to the San Francisco Giants and then loading the bases in the bottom of the ninth, only to fall short by a run. Observers say what marked this experiment in defeat as a true advancement in humanity’s march toward thoroughly understanding futility was the way it built on a key discovery earlier in the week, wherein Met researchers learned they could hit three home runs in a game on consecutive days and not stop losing.

A spokesperson for the Nobel Prize committee indicated “this may be the most impressive manifestation of losing we’ve seen in modern times. There were and are so many aspects to how the Mets go about both not winning and altogether not succeeding, that ‘staggering’ doesn’t begin to describe it.

“They even thought to wear black.”

Fueled by splendid starting pitching from Christian Scott, the Mets achieved one of what experts call “the all-important losing first step,” wasting a very good outing when they don’t get nearly enough of those to begin with. Scott, a rookie, pitched six innings, giving up only two runs on two hits, theoretically positioning him for his first major league win. He was succeeded to the mound by in-limbo closer Edwin Diaz, receiving his first assignment since his newfound propensity to blow saves sidelined him from high-leverage situations the previous weekend. Diaz persevered through the seventh without giving up any runs.

“That, too, is key,” said another source in the scientific community. “Diaz emerging unscathed after Scott looked so sharp was reason enough to raise the hopes of Mets fans. A real losing team will make a person rooting for them think things are looking up, setting the stage for a tremendous kick in the [expletives].”

The Mets had built a 6-2 lead on three solo home runs — struck by J.D. Martinez, Mark Vientos and Pete Alonso — along with several other key hits. Their batters also hit some balls that traveled far, only to be caught.

“If you were a believer in harbingers,” the scientific source said, “you could begin to see what was ultimately coming. Yet you can’t be fully convinced until the proof is presented to you.”

Reed Garrett, briefly considered a revelation in relief, emerged to pitch the eighth inning. After a pair of somewhat lucky hits (though scientists debate how much “luck” is involved when an opponent is playing the Mets), Garrett’s night began to disintegrate with two outs, as he gave up an RBI double, a walk and, finally, a grand slam to Patrick Bailey, converting what was left of the Mets’ advantage into a one-run deficit. An inning later, Jorge Lopez allowed a solo homer to Mike Yastrzemski to make the score Giants 8 Mets 6.

With the visitors’ insurance run added to their burden and Camilo Doval on to close for San Francisco, the Mets made feints toward a comeback of their own. “Ah,” one scientist was moved to note. “It’s the comeback that can’t miss but does miss that creates a ‘novel loss’. You think you’ve seen it all, but then the Mets show you something you hadn’t thought possible.” Sure enough, a DJ Stewart fly ball that Yastrzemski couldn’t handle in right became a double. Brett Baty, like Stewart a pinch-hitter in the ninth, placed a ball beyond the infield that appeared destined to become a base hit. It took a fairly spectacular play by Thairo Estrada and first baseman LaMonte Wade to retire him, but retire him they did. Stewart went to third, but there was one out.

“A team on the verge of winning has no worse than a two-on, no out situation there,” the Nobel committee spokesperson explained. “Stewart might have even scored. But these were the Mets doing losing things to break new ground in coming up shy of victory. It was astounding.”

It was also only beginning. Francisco Lindor did drive in Stewart to bring the Mets to within 8-7. Succeeding batter Alonso converted the first pitch he saw from Doval into a certain double play ground ball ticketed to end the game. Except San Francisco shortstop Marco Luciano — who had early pulled a baserunning boner — booted the ball to place Lindor on third and Alonso on first. Alonso was switched out for pinch-runner Tyrone Taylor, and Taylor quickly stole second.

“Can’t you see the beauty?” the scientific source asked. “Taylor taking second without a throw was the sort of thing that usually happens to the Mets. He was the potential winning run. No cogent baseball watcher outside the Mets’ sphere of influence would have thought New York wouldn’t win. But the Mets’ ability to harness nature’s ballet to drop what is handed them is what elevated this experience.

“Perhaps Mets fans knew in their bones what was coming. Everybody else had to have chills.”

An intentional walk to Brandon Nimmo loaded the bases with one out. Cleanup hitter Martinez, possessor of a hot bat, was up. The Mets somehow “proceeded to crack the code” on losing, the scientific source said. Not only did Martinez, a proven professional hitter, strike out, but Vientos flicked a roller to third base that would have been impossible for Matt Chapman to handle, let alone make an effective throw on, but Chapman both handled Vientos’s ball and threw him out to end the game.

“The chef’s kiss on all this,” the scientific source said, “was the Mets challenging the call, as if there was even a shred of possibility it would be overturned. A perfect grace note of after-the-fact desperation.”

The Giants had completed their third consecutive road-game comeback of four runs themselves, but it was the Mets, 9-21 in their last thirty games, consistently finding yet another “new and exciting” way to lose that left scientists worldwide buzzing. “The Mets,” said one researcher in Asia, “stand as an inspiration to anybody who doesn’t believe the worst can’t keep happening.”