If you were beginning to worry that the All-Star break would impede the Mets’ gathering momentum for a push toward playoff contention, rest easy this week. There is no momentum. There will be no playoff contention.
All provisional prognostication is subject to change with the emergence of the next six-game winning streak, but by the time the Mets win six games in a row again, the All-Star break and the success that briefly preceded it before disappearing amid a lost weekend will be a faded memory — though should they somehow confound expectations and bolt from the “second half” gate winning six in a row to give them twelve of their last fourteen and make us all look like ninnies for giving up on them so soon, mazel tov. When we’re sure our team is sunk and they upend our certainty by rising to the surface and then some, we couldn’t be happier to be wrong. Our mood relative to the Mets is subject to change, too.
But we’re not going to be wrong. This ballclub’s brief peek at the light at the end of the tunnel revealed too much glare for them to handle. It’s dark in there again, likely for good in 2023.
Bill Parcells is oft-quoted on the subject of your record directly reflecting who you are. The Mets are a 42-48 baseball team. Moreover, they are what their Games Behind status says they are. After playing as well as they have all year for six games, before playing versus the Padres as they have more typically for the next two, they sit seven games behind the third-best non-first place record in the National League, with more teams than it is worth counting between them and that final postseason qualification slot. Had they gone into the All-Star break on an undeniable high note, they’d still be fairly far away and still need to step over a fistful of opponents, but momentum makes a fan see all kinds of crazy things over the horizon. And fans want to see all kinds of crazy things over the horizon. We don’t need to patronize comedy clubs. Given the slightest opportunity, we’re delighted to kid ourselves.
No punchline remains to this would-be 2023 rush into the Wild Card scramble. Fifty years after we learned to never say never, it’s over before it’s over. Saturday’s loss in San Diego a person could perhaps slough off as a pause in escalating fortunes, adequate pitching being shaded by better pitching. Sunday, though, was a bow out of conceivable contention most apropos of these Mets. They didn’t pitch well. They barely hit at all. They were hit five times (a franchise mark for pitches leaving a mark). They incurred an injury that had nothing to do with hit-by-pitches. They looked defeated. They were defeated.
In a good year, limiting our advice to “Let’s Go Mets!” is sufficient. This isn’t a good year. Thus, at the risk of presumptuousness, I will take it upon myself to issue instructions to the players who have lost 48 of 90 and in whom I’ve expressed little faith regarding their next 72.
• Each Met who was dinged by Joe Musgrove and Tom Cosgrove on Sunday should apply additional ice to their bruises as applicable.
• Tommy Pham and his groin should take it particularly easy for four days, following imaging.
• Max Scherzer (5.1 IP, 5 ER) should put his uncooperative slider out of his mind much as Manny Machado put it out of Petco Park.
• Pete Alonso and replacement pick Kodai Senga should enjoy their All-Star jaunt to Seattle and not get hurt.
• Everybody from the hottest-hitting rookie catcher to the most interchangeable optionable reliever should take a breather over the break. Drape yourselves in comfy bathrobes and order in pancakes, or do whatever major leaguers who are not going anywhere after this actually do on their days off.
• Rest up for a few days and don’t dwell on a season that’s gone to hell and shows no sign of coming back.
Actually, that last bit applies to us. Mets fans deserve a break today. And tomorrow. And the next day. And the day after that. Come Friday, maybe we’ll be kidding ourselves anew that can’t we wait for our team to return. We’re hilarious that way.
After 90 games, the 1973 Mets were 40-50, 9 games behind. 5 teams in front of them for a playoff spot. They would play .500 baseball until August 30, when they were 61-71. You know the rest of the story. They’re the Amazin’ Mets. Ya Gotta Believe.
Because there were fewer teams in the NL, no inter-league play and a schedule that skewed heavily towards games in your division, the 1973 Mets had a ton more opportunities to knock off the five teams ahead of them in the second half.
Plus, the Mets in mid-July were a severely wounded team with the promise of reinforcements on the way. They all got healthy at the same time, the team got hot, and the Mets that pulled off the Miracle II in Aug/Sept of ’73 bore a remarkable resemblance to the 1969 team.
There’s no reason to think anything like that is going to happen in 2023.
Is it me or does it seem like every time we need Scherzer to step up and pitch the way he is supposed to he falls flat on his face?
it’s not you.
$43million per annum isn’t what it used to be for effective pitching. his $uckiness guarantees the mets will remain stuck with him.
and where would in the dregs of the standings would this team be minus pham?
the streak was fun…til it ended.
The 73 Mets had a younger starting staff, with Seaver and Koosman not yet 30 and at the peak of their abilities. The 2023 Mets have had numerous chances to show us who they are — and now we know.
Excellent point about the ‘73 pitching staff- younger and better across the board in both starters and relievers. As a counterpoint, I don’t think those Mets had two hitters challenging for the league lead in homers and RBI’s ( Rusty may have been close) or a rookie catcher setting the game on fire – nor did they have the bench strength ( at least on paper) of this team. I do remember those Mets were constantly plagued by injuries – although nothing as devastating as losing the league’s best closer for the full season. They were also still riding a tidal wave of fan support and good will from 1969, while the current team is plagued by the memories of collapses both recent and less recent.
All of which is to say, no two teams are exactly alike, and it’s a bit unfair to lay a 50-year old burden on this current team, and expect a turnaround like 1973. This team can still make the playoffs -the ‘73 team is instructive in that regard – but they all have to play and pitch better and most importantly, their “luck” needs to turn. The great Roger Angell posited that good luck was always the mark of a winning team, but Branch Rickey also knew that teams make their own luck.
Just about everything that could go wrong for the Mets this year already has, but you have to watch for the tide to change ( and sadly, it may not). It’s why Gary and Howie were both talking about the Mets’ luck this past week, and why yesterday seemed to be a reversion to what has been the norm this season.
You’ll know if the tide of bad luck has really turned for good when a ball bounces off the top of the wall and turns into an out; when a journeyman player is traded, and then untraded, and then wins the most important game of the season with a walk-off homer; when a black cat crosses in front of your rival’s dugout during a key series; or when a little roller up along first gets by a steady fielder and turns into the greatest comeback story ever.
When outrageously positive things start to happen for the Mets, you’ll know. But until you know, Ya Gotta Believe.
Ya Gotta Believe!
As I told the Mets ticket rep during last week’s streak – he was calling to let me know ticket plan renewals for 2024 would start next month – a lot is riding on July.
I’m not quite ready to close the book on this season – I have invoked 1973 for far too many years to be that clear-eyed – but I have started making other plans for October.
Ahhhhhhhh okay, that’s why my rep called me last week. I couldn’t answer and he left a message along the lines of “Hey, it’s [XXXXX] from The Mets. Just checking in to see how it’s going. Let me know if you need any help with anything.”
I knew the 1973 Mets. The 1973 Mets were friends of mine. Senator, you’re no 1973 Mets.
AMEN.
A playoff run now would be absolutely momentous, but I just can’t see this bunch pulling a 1973 out of their hats. Thus far, this has been one of the most demoralizing seasons in recent memory. I rarely go into a season with high expectations, and I won’t be making that mistake re: the Mets again anytime soon. For whatever reason, the 2023 Mets are a freaking exasperating bunch. Every time they look like they might get something going, they yank the rug out from under us again. I assumed they were going to sweep San Diego in grand fashion and go into the break riding a wave of hype, THEN face plant. But they couldn’t even do THAT right.
You watch players like Alonso, Nimmo, McNeil, Alvarez, Lindor, and you KNOW they’re good, and you WANT to love them, but they just don’t win. Imagine being told back in March that Alvarez was going to emerge as the most exciting Mets catcher in ages. You’d have been over the moon, and certain it’d be the key to pushing the Mets over the top. And it hasn’t made a shred of difference. I am totally befuddled by how a team with this much pure talent can possibly be so crappy and boring.
The first two thirds of 2022 seems like it never even happened. There weren’t even any ominous signs. The bottom just fell out, and they’ve been a listless sub-mediocre blob of nothingness ever since. The prospect of playing out the rest of a meaningless schedule just depresses the hell out of me. I really hope they prove me wrong, but it just seems so unlikely right now.
Sure, the 1973 team had great pitching, and then timely hitting when Harrelson, Cleon, Grote, and Milner all came back from injuries. And Tug finally woke up. Tug was last year’s Diaz, but no Diaz this year.
They put on a great stretch draaave in September (&Oct), going 21-8 to take the NL East.
Overall, they had one terrific month of baseball in 1973, and then had the same exact team in 1974, except for Mays, Beauchamp, McAndrew, and Capra.
And then the 1974 same exact team played poorly, finishing 71-91. The team this year is very similar to last year, but they just aren’t playing as well. However, we can still turn it around because we currently have a better team than whoever the 3rd WC will be.
I will tune in tomorrow for about a minute to see the AL/NL CityConnect uniforms, and then check the boxscore to see if Alonso or Senga did anything.
Regarding the HR Derby, it was good that Alonso’s pitcher was not there this year, because it looked as if he was trying to get him out. But whoever pitched to him this year was awful, hitting the outside corner on every pitch.
Absolutely epic, unimpeachable article, Greg.
Regarding the 1974 Mets, I remember that they decided to go into that season with the good-field, no-hit Don Hahn in a center field platoon with the equally uninspiring Dave Schneck, an example of both hubris and stinginess on the part of the Mets and the late, unlamented M. Donald Grant. (At the end of the 1974 season, both Hahn and Schneck were quickly schlepped off to Philadelphia, along with fan favorite Tug McGraw, in exchange for center fielder Del Unser, reliever Mac Scarce and young catcher John “Bad Dude” Stearns.)
PS Maybe “Mad” Max Scherzer should now be known as “Mediocre” Max Scherzer?
“Kranepool wishes that Berra hadn’t started Seaver on three days’ rest in Game 6 in Oakland with the Mets leading the best-of-7 series, 3-2. “I think Yogi made a mistake,” says Kranepool, whose memoir, “The Last Miracle,” is coming out in August.”
I recall there were lots of questions on that move by Yogi when it occured.
Sigh……
The assumption, which of course cannot be proved or disproved, is that a well-rested George Stone was going to go out to the mound in Oakland and pitch great.
George Stone had a nice season in 1973. But he had ERAs of higher than 5.00 in the previous season, and two successive subsequent seasons, and his career was done by the end of 1975.
It’s just as likely that Stone, in a hostile atmosphere facing the greatest pressure of his career, might have gotten shelled by an A’s lineup that hit left-handed pitching MUCH better than it hit right-handed pitching (.275 vs. LHP, .253 vs. RHP, with much higher slugging vs. lefties).
It’s something I rarely ever hear anybody offer as a possibility, but it’s an extremely plausible scenario. Maybe Yogi really did have his reasons, and maybe they weren’t all so foolish. I can tell you, if George Stone started Game 6 and gave up 5 runs in 3 innings, and then the A’s won Game 7 on top of that, all you’d have been hearing for the last half-century is how Yogi could have closed the series out with Seaver and Matlack.
Absolutely. I think Yogi’s thought was: “Do I want to go with Seaver and Matlack or Stone and Seaver? If Stone gets bombed and then the Mets lose Game 7 with Seaver everybody would still be saying “how could you leave Matlack on your bench, he was the your best pitcher in the playoffs.”
Everybody also forgets that in 2003 Jack Mckeon made the exact same decision in starting Josh Beckett on 3 days rest in game 6 against the Yankees. All the sportswriters brought up Yogi’s decision and how it was a big mistake. After he shutout the Yankees you never hear about it again.
Ah yes…Seaver vs. Stone. The ultimate Monday morning quarterback debate. Such debates are usually fun and usually futile. Consider this example:
1986 World Series, Game 6. Ninth inning. Tie score. Howard Johnson is pinch-hitting with Ray Knight on second, Mookie on first, and no outs. The “obvious” move for Davey Johnson is to have HoJo bunt the runner to third. Instead, Davey has HoJo swing away, and he strikes out. Lee Mazzilli then hits a fly ball which would have scored Knight from third, won the game, and sent the Series to a Game 7. Unfortunately, Knight was on second, he didn’t score, and the game went to the tenth inning.
I rewatched the game this past offseason. Throughout the top of the tenth, when Rick Aguilera gave up two runs, through the first two Mets batters in the bottom of the tenth, the announcers were absolutely destroying Davey Johnson. They were talking about how he ruined the best season the Mets ever had by his decision not to bunt HoJo, and how that would be the only thing anyone ever remembered about Davey’s managerial career, or about HoJo’s playing career. Then Mookie happened.
Consider this. If Davey had made the “right” decision, and Mazz had won the game in the ninth with a walkoff sac fly, would anyone still be talking about that game today?
Just something to think about while our current Mets try to rest up and get ready to get off the mat in the second half. I’m with Bruce: Ya Gotta Believe.
Just got a look at the AL/NL softball uniforms….. Click!
50 years on, and I never had a strong opinion one way or another. It all depends on how you sleep at night if you lose.
Matlack was a budding star, 1972 Rookie of the Year, and pitched well in Games 1 and 4. Stone was hot that year, but no Matlack overall.
Gotta figure Seaver and Matlack could not lose both. Maybe Yogi was right.
I remember during the sports segment of one the local channels’ nightly news broadcasts, they aired a snippet of an interview of Sal Bando boarding the plane at JFK or LAG for flight back Oakland and him conceding that it didn’t look too good for the A’s having to face Seaver and Matlack down 3 games to 2. The Stone proposition was always second guessing, but it does make for an agonizing “what if”