|
|
|
There is an intangible that Omar Minaya has to take into consideration this offseason: Team chemistry.
The 2008 Rays had it. The Red Sox of recent years had it. In fact, any great dynasty, such as the Yankees, Chicago Bulls, or Dallas Cowboys had it. Good team chemistry is the difference between being a great team on paper, and being a great team on the field.
In 1986, there was in-fighting between Keith and Darryl, but they shared a common vision…to win. Every player knew their role, and performed it to the best of their ability in order to win despite any differences they may have had.
When they were on the field, they were one cohesive unit and it showed. They didn’t need to be friends; they just needed an equal desire to win a championship.
A team’s ability to stick together, have each others’ backs, and fight to win during pressure-filled situations and losing streaks is what makes a championship team. They aren’t affected by the media or the fans as they strive unwaveringly towards their common goal.
The Mets need to acquire players with a ‘winner’s mentality’ to supplement David Wright. Lenny Dykstra was an example of a win-at-all-costs type of player that they need. Cliff Floyd also had a ‘winner’s mentality,’ and was a positive clubhouse presence that contributed to team solidarity. It’s about more than talent alone.
The Mets showed heart in many of their games this year, such as on September 25 when Ryan Church’s nifty slide and Carlos Beltran’s walkoff hit won them a game against the Cubs. But there were just as many games where they seemed distracted, as if they weren’t playing together with any true sense of purpose.
Obviously pitching is the team’s greatest need, but as Minaya considers new additions this winter, he needs to be conscious of chemistry so the team can finally get to where it needs to be.
 |
 |
 |
RSS 2.0 Both comments and pings are currently closed.
too bad players don’t come with ingredient labels, so you can know empirically who’ll work best with whom. One of the reasons I love sports is that mystery ingredient, and how you never really know what you’re cooking up until it either rises or falls…and when you get it right, it’s sort of a miracle.
Here’s to hoping omar finds the right ingredients…
“too bad players don’t come with ingredient labels, so you can know empirically who’ll work best with whom.”
Which is why you should chase stats and not chemistry. when chemistry happens, great, but there’s no way to know.
totally agree
I think Cliff Floyd should come back and play the same roll he played with Tamps Bay. … Pinch Hitter/PT Outfielder. Basically another Endy Chavez. I love Uncle Cliff and think his leadership is missed badly in that clubhouse! Id rather have him then Marlon Anderson, Damion Easley or a third Catcher
I think chemistry is what the Phillies had - that fighting spirit and belief that no deficit was too great. I was in Philadelphia when the Mets had a 10-0 lead. At Shea, there would have been deafening quiet. In Phillie they screamed with every 3-1 count. They came back and made it 10-9. All of us Mets fans covered our eyes. Later on, that game allowed them to overcome the 7-0 deficit in late August. The fact is they believed abd backed up each other - led by that Victorino fellow. Remeber the ‘86 Mets had fight. This team, when faced with a blusteirng Marlins team that basically said they would ruin the Mets’ season (twice), allowed them to do so instead of shoving those comments up their (bleep). That’s the mark of a team that doesn’t have chemistry. So I think chemistry - translated to will to win - and coming through for each other - is very important.
They also had this: REALLY good players. And not many bad players. Or hell, even more than moderately below average players.
More importantly, how do you KNOW when chemistry happens? Its easy to say the Rays had “chemistry” because they went to the World Series. Name a team with Great Chemistry that finished below .500. Or a team with no Chemistry that won it all. Its a self-serving label that really makes no sense.
Very true. Winning makes people happy. Happy people looks like good chemistry.
The other thing is, the same group of people can have “good chemistry” at one moment and not so good at another. Ever go out with a group of friends and have such a great time that it just felt like it was the perfect mix of people, and then try to replicate that and have an evening fall flat? That’s chemistry too. It’s there once and nobody can tell why, then it’s gone and nobody can tell why.
Or maybe the team could grow some balls, stick up for each other, and get into a fight when its deserving.
hmm…sounds like the 86 mets, the 2008 rays, the cowboys of the 90’s, the red sox of 2004…hmm interesting.
Good point.
It’s really quite sad when people who make over half a million a year to play baseball can’t find a way to get that “winning” mentality.
This mentality is the reason why David Eckstein is still someone’s shortstop.
You’re trying to say that players in the major leagues do not want to perform well and help their teams win? What are you saying?
The phrase “winning mentality” means nothing. David Eckstein was a member of 2 World Series winning clubs. This doesn’t not mean he has some unquantifiable trait which makes teams win just because of his presence.
This is all nonsensical.
James, you should have checked your English-to-Sarcasm dictionary.
Ahh OK, my bad. I’m usually pretty good at picking up sarcasm. I thought your comment was plausibly serious, given most of the comments I see on this blog…
Very well written; I concur with the thrust of your arguement, 100%
My goodness this is such irresponsible baloney.
Met fans will read this and think there’s something to it. The 2007 Rays were essentially the same exact roster as the 2008 Rays… where was the success from chemistry???
Reading this makes me angry.
agreed
THEY DIDN”T HAVE EVAN LONGORIA SO HAHAHAHAHAHA YOU’RE WRONG!!!!
Wait, it doesn’t matter the roster. You’re still right.
Ummm
they added chad bradford….troy percival…which helped out their pen as it was one of the worst in 07
they added Rookie of the Year Evan Longoria at 3B….they added jason barlett at SS …got rid of jorge cantu…moved Iwamura to 2B…
thats 3/4 of your infield changed…
they got rid of elijah dukes and delmon young who were both head cases…they add Cliff Floyd who was said to be a great influence in the clubhouse
I think you can make the case that the 2007 Rays and 2008 Rays were just “slightly” different
lol
I hear LoDuca knew some stuff about chemestry
“Chemistry” is a lot like “grittiness”, “clutchiness”, and “being a winner”. No such thing. Teams that win have great chemistry, like the 72-74 A’s (hated each other), the 1976-81 Yankees (mostly hated each other) and the 86 Mets (largely hated each other). Teams that lose have “no chemistry”, a la the BoSox of the early ’90’s (”25 men, 25 cabs”.) Teams have won loving each other (1979 Pirates) and lost that way, and vice-versa. It’s all done on the field, not in the clubhouse. Unlike football or basketball, baseball is largely a game of individual confontations–pitcher vs. batter. Other than being ready to play when the game starts, and a few skills such as the DP combination, the rest is all a myth.
did you ever play?
you sound confused to me.
i played at a high level, and i agree with him. chemistry is BS in baseball.
Amen.
But apparently you need to have played baseball to understand that people can achieve things while hating each others guts.
chemistry is just a word trying to quantify the unquantifiable…it’s not necessarily “like” or “hate”. I’d absolutely argue that certain ineffable factors exist in the daily dynamic, and these factors affect the performance of players individually and as a group. Of course I can’t prove it, but I’ve certainly worked in groups that performed differently based on intagibles. Maybe this guy drives that guy nuts, but also brings out an extra gear that makes him go just a bit harder.
Like Tidewater says above, it’s folly to chase guys based on that stuff vs. identifiable and measurable skill, but that doesn’t mean those other things don’t exist. We just don’t know how to measure and knw them.
Chemistry is way overrated, especially in baseball which is more of an individual sport. It’s simple, the Mets need to take the fact that they are hated around the league, and turn it into an “Us Against the World” mentality. This will take care of the chemistry issue. We also need to supplement our core with good role players. Oh yeah, we should probably fix that bullpen too.
i rather have pitching.. PITCHING WINS!!!!!!!!
you are correct on the teams needs, but not correct on how they need to supplement Wright, the only guy who was CLUTCH on this team this year was Santana (and Delgado for a month, too bad not the last 3 weeks of Sept.)
Winning=Chemistry That simple
David Wright is too Hollywood, he’s part of the problem.
David couldnt get a hit after the 3rd inning all year, Why is he the one with the “winners mentality”…when you talk about “winners mentatility” what you mean is CLUTCH, and Wright didnt have a clutch hit the 2nd half, in fact he had most of the un-clutch at bats for this team as I’m sure you can all recall the exact dates and games even, they were that highlighted.
you are correct on the teams needs, but not correct on how they need to supplement Wright, the only guy who was CLUTCH on this team this year was Santana (and Delgado for a month, too bad not the last 3 weeks of Sept.)
by the way I could not get that post to come up 11 times and had to take out 2 words to get it on there on of those words was FREE
what was the other?!?
part of the spam protection. FR EE cia lis, etc..
the other word was P A-ss
what is offensive about those 2 words put together?!?!?!?! explanation is needed. or just the latter, is it that a bad word are the last 3 letters of a normal word????
Sorry to disagree with you Regis, but David Wright does not have a winning attitude. I don;t know why fans , the media , and ownership is ready to ordain him captain of this team. Stop forcing the issue. He is NOT captain material. He is not a leader in the clubhouse, or on the field. When ever the media speaks to him, he always says the politically correct things. Sometimes I wished he showed more emotion calling out publicly whats wrong with this team. They already have leadership in the 2 Carlos’s. Good or bad that’s the fact. David Wright is not nor will he ever be the leader of this Mets team. He is a superstar, and a great player, but he will always be a role player. Sorry
I agree he has not shown that leadership at all and I am sick of pleyers and media making out like he is when he is not.
So you’ve visited the clubhouse, and can confirm this? Oh wait, you’re just “speculating” or “talking out of your….”
Oh, and chemistry is completely overrated.
Sylar im not speculating anything David Wirght is not a leader at all. It is far from his team. Delgado, Beltran, Santana just to name a few have a much bigger influence over the players on this team then Wright. If you don’t see that then well there is something wrong with you.
I agree that chemistry is completely overrated. If a team is winning and playing good it’s oh they have good chemistry and if a team is losing people say they don’t have good chemistry. It means nothing.
But at the same time leaders get other players on there team pointing in the right direction and there play inspires others around them like Delgado’s play inspired the Mets for 2 months. David Wright does not do that.
This is truly unbelievable.
David Wright has one moderately bad clutch year–and is still responsible for 5 wins despite his lessened degree of production in the clutch–and a good portion of his fan base is idiotically claiming that he is “not a winning player”; and some are so disconnected from reality that they are saying that one of the 10 most valuable players in the game–and the rightful MVP of 2007–is a “role player”.
He’s not even 26 yet, and he does all he can to win, and people turn on him this way and buy into these ridiculous slanders and pin him with these bogus reputations.
(Hey, here’s some clutch players: Evan Longoria, who got what, one or two hits in the world series? As did “MVP” Jimmy Rollins? I wonder if the Ray’s fans contingent of idiots is as large as the Mets fans. If the Rays fans continue to be supportive of Longoria and realize that he had a poorly timed slump, and that he carried them in the early rounds, I might drop the Mets and follow the Rays, whose fans deserve them.
The sad part is that if the Mets get rid of Wright and Reyes and lose for a generation, I would not even have the pleasure of seeing these fools–among whom I count Regis Courtemanche–have to eat their words. They will learn nothing, and will continue to do their best to drive their best players out of town and ensure a continuing legacy of futility from their team.
I would think players and media know more about leadership and who displays it and who doesn’t than fans.
I don’t see how a fan can label either of the Carloses leaders and say Wright isn’t one.
matt, take care of this how can this word not be allowed on this site:
P-A-S-S
How is Cliff Floyd on that list? Just because he was close with Wright? Don’t get it at all. What has Floyd shown in his career to be a win at all cost player?
I liked Cliff but come on why is he always brought up on this site as a player who was this great win at all cost, gritty type guy?
I know he was well liked but lots of players are well liked does not make them win at all costs players
So in the games the mets won, they had chemistry? And in the games they lost, they didn’t have chemistry?
Just because Wright was squeezing the bat a little too hard late in games this year doesn’t make him a bad leader, or a bad chemistry guy, or a bad anything.
I just don’t get what has Wright done to show he is a leader? He talks to the media more maybe then some of the other players that is it. Just because he is the face of the franchise meaning the Mets market around him and what not does not mean he is a leader. He has not shown he is a leader.
I don’t see how he’s shown himself not to be a leader. I don’t play for the mets. I don’t know who people look up to on the team for leadership. I don’t know if that person even exists. I’m just saying I don’t think it matters.
Who was the Rays leader? They had a pretty nice little year because their pitching was nasty. end of story
Who gives a flying F if Wright shows leadership or not? As long as he hits .300/.400/.500 with 30+ homers and plays great defense ON THE FIELD, he can do whatever he wants.
This is so annoying.
guys would you trade murphy for Bobby Jenks? he is available….
without batting an eye
No way.
If we want to be like the 1986 Mets, we would do well to sign CC Sabathia and pick up a young pitcher with some moxie. The last time I checked, the 86 team could pitch.
Murphy for Jenks? I think they would want a young pitcher, too.
Jenks and Sabathia on the same buffet line?
niese?
I love how there is no acknowledgement or reference to the Phillies having any chemistry.
There’s nothing wrong with recognizing them for what they are and moving on.
In my opinion there was really no need to reference the Phillies in the initial post, as enough examples were cited, and additionally when I try to use the words ‘Phillies’ and ‘chemistry’ in the same sentence it doesn’t work for me because I’m immediately reminded that Jimmy Rollins would rather drive his own car to a road game than ride the team bus, and Pat Burrell is generally portrayed in the media as being sullen and unliked by other players and coaches in the organization, so unless the sole accepted definition for chemistry is ‘winning’ I find not using the Phillies as an example of chemistry to be completely appropriate.
You’re an idiot. When was the last time Pat Burrell was portrayed negatively in the media? The Larry Bowa years? Coincidence? I think not.
The Phillies have an enormous amount more chemistry than the lowly Mets. Not even close.
really? we’re arguing about who has more chemistry? Uhhh, maybe the team that won the world series really like playing together because they wont the GD world series. Just a thought
The Phillie fan who, not satisfied with his favorite team’s world championship, trolls another team’s blog and ignores half my argument while attempting to quantify the unquantifiable, calls me an idiot. Brilliant.
Murphy and Niese for Jenks. Let’s throw in Santana just to be safe.
Why oh why would the White Sox do that? (Besides the Santana joke)
Who cares about the Phillies chemistry. This is a Mets blog. Hence the name “Metsblog.com”…get it?
the chicago bulls had michael jordan and scotty pippen. the 96-00 yankees had mariano rivera, derek jeter and roger clemens. the cowboys had troy aikman, michael irvin, emmit smith and deion sanders. they had the PIECES to win.
intangibles are a ridiculous notion. david eckstein or shane victorino don’t possess magical championship powers. their teams had the right personnel to win. sometimes team get hot at the right time (’06 cardinals, ‘08 phillies), but more often than not, the teams that underachieve despite looking good on paper and aren’t in a position to win championships have a glaring weakness that costs them. for the ‘07 and ‘08 mets, it was their bullpen.
there’s not special potion. get better personnel. a good bullpen = a good team next year and most likely a postseason berth. it’s not voodoo. pedro cerrano isn’t needed to solve this equation.
Devil’s advocate:
In 2007 the Yankees had Wang, Pettitte, A-rod, Jeter, Clemens, Giambi, Cano and the works.
Why didn’t they win?
Umm, they made the playoffs, which is a giant cr apshoot. If a GM puts together a team that makes the playoffs, he’s done his job.
Was it Brian Cashman’s fault that Wang stunk it up in 2 starts vs. the Indians? no. Does it mean Wang is a worthless pitcher? Of course not! Every team can go on hot streaks and cold streaks, it’s bad luck when it happens in a 5 game playoff series.
I tottally disagree with Regis…Teams with enough talent somehow have great chemistry…The Mets did not have enough talent to win, the Phils and Rays did…end of story…With a bullpen and good 4-5 starters this team is just as good at the phillies…chemistry happens over time, you can’t acquire it in the free agent market.
Team chemistry is overrated. Winning makes for the best team chemistry, and having solid talent all around makes for winning. You can win championships with malcontents, prima donnas, and clubhouse cancers, but you can’t win with players too old, too brittle and depth too thin.
rf
Agreed, and speaking of that game.
I was at that September 25 game and had crappy upper deck tickets down the left feild line. Well, it was rainy and yucky and not alot of fans in the park so i got kicked out of 5 or 6 differnt sections. Eventually found upper deck right behind home plate and they were decent. But after we were down 3 at the end of the 8th. My friend decided to go home b/c the pessimistic, yelling fans and it seemed the team had lost all hope. So relucktantly I went home wishing for the team to show him up while listening to the radio. As we all know the mets came back and I couldn’t help but look over and smile to him in the car.
why not set up a package with the tigers. We could send them any of the bullpen guys, castillo and or schneider. As a return getting robertson or willis as a #5. or add prospects and get magglio. Then proceed to trade or sign for a pitcher.
yes, I always said the tigers could be a good trading partner team for us, they need relievers and we have a heilman,scho,feliciano to trade.
Yes, great fit. They need relievers and we dump our crappy ones on them. I’m sure they’ll love it!
The unspoken message behind saying the Mets had no “chemistry” is that they had superior talent but for some ineffable reason could not leverage it into a division title. Which is a delusion.
Maybe the Mets would be better if they went out and got better players. Maybe they wouldn’t constantly be looking for this or that if they drafted well or if they didn’t sign gimpy second basemen on the wrong side of 30 to horrendous contracts.
It’s an inefficiently-run organization at best, and to chalk their failures up to the absence of some scrappy gritster in the clubhouse is to fundamentally deny why they failed.
But it’s a lot harder to be optimistic about the future when you look at it that way. Especially considering Omar was signed to a 4 year deal.
Don’t know what to tell you.
I don’t agree, the Mets didn’t have enough talent AND they are soft. But if it was one or the other, you can add talent easier than swapping out your talented guys for good ballplayers.
Huh?
I think I’m going to name my next dog Scrappy Gritster.
I’d love to mount a valiant, fact-filled argument against you haplo but when I think of all the 2008 ABs wasted on the likes of Luis Castillo, Marlon Anderson, Argenis Reyes, Gustavo Molina, Trot Nixon, Chris Aguila, Andy Phillips and Abraham Nunez, it shuts me right up. The only weak solace I can take is that Val Pascucci was never called up or I’d have had to include his name too.
The organization isn’t necessarily inefficient. It has been efficient in many respects, actually. It has a high talent farm system which year after year has provided the team with good players or trade chips. They signed the best centerfielder in the game and traded dreck for the best picher. Not to mention one of the best 3B and SS in the game as well.
The problem last year, despite the fact that Pedro was terrible, was really the bullpen. Bullpens are upredictable, and to an extent we must live with it. Omar should do something about it, and if he doesn’t I’ll be angry, but just to falt out dis the entire organization due to the failure of 7 arbitrary guys is a little bit of an overstatement.
High talent farm system?
Fernando Martinez, Jefry Marte, Wilmer Flores, Brad Holt, Ike Davis — lots of really young guys who have incredible talent but haven’t fully translated it yet.
Then by your standard, just about every team has a high-talent farm system?
correction “sign a catcher”
ss reyes
CF beltran
3b Wright
1b Delgado (if traded Texiera)
LF magglio ordonez, matt holiday or
rf ryan church
2b murphy (hopefully)
C scheider varitek or rangers catcher.
you’re LF situation is kind of….. meh. I don’t understand how the Mets get either Ordonez or Holliday, or why they’d put up with a single year of their contracts.
As for catcher, V-tek is trash, Rangers catcher is good if his name rhymes with Maltalamacchia and we deal Heilman for him.
The Bulls didn’t have chemistry - they had Michael Jordan.
Different Sport… You can win with a singular superior talent in Basketball, happens all the time. In Baseball and Football you need talent all over the place.
And remember they did have Scottie Pippen. Jordan won nothing until he was there.
Chemistry is hard to come by, hard to figure out. You know it when you see it, but it’s hard to put together.
That said, get Eric Byrnes in here please.
What your comment looked like.
2 sentences of making a good point
and another one totally contradicting it.
I think Delgado had a lot to do with the “Chemistry” issue. Had he decided to play for Willie the race wouldn’t have come down to the last week of the season. Instead he slacks off, and sulks. The minute willie is gone he Blows up and goes on a tear? Coincidence? This was a man who spurned coming to the Mets because Omar was targeting him because he was Latino and could help bring along the younger Latino’s on the team, most notably a 27 year old Beltran and a 22 year old Reyes.
That’s the type of un-professionalism that the Mets don’t need. They need more guys who even if they don’t get along know that they have a common goal. Doesn’t matter who the manager is. They play hard hard day in and day out. Even Manny, who looks lackadaisical, is known to work out pre and post game as hard as anyone in the majors.
The Manager is over-blown. A good one is hard to find, but can you tell me that Jerry did a better job on the field then Willie. No, if anything he was worse, but the players liked him, and they didn’t like Willie for whatever reason. Most notably Delgado and Reyes. Now Reyes you can put to the side as a little immature, Willie was pretty much the first manager he had, and he wanted him to be a boring stiff like the Yankee players and not be who he is. But a 15 year professional like Carlos Delgado should have been different. When he heard rumblings that Willie thought he didn’t have it anymore he stopped playing for him and lead the revolt against him.
That kind of mentality is what you need to avoid.
Are you kidding???
I can’t stand when people think Delgado slacked off because he didn’t like Willie and then decided to suddenly start hitting when he was fired. That is by far the dumbest post of the thread- and this comment thread has been full of some dumb posts.
Unless your there and you know someone in the clubhouse don’t start insinuating that Delgado “led a revolt” against Wille- its insulting to a player that has always been portayed as an honerable and stand-up guy by every legit media source.
Maybe a more realistic explaination is that he had wrist surgery in the offseason. I hear thats a pretty important body part in swinging a bat. Maybe it took his 36 year old body a little longer to recover and get his timing back than anyone expected.
And ps- you should look closer at the stats. Delgado didn’t get hot as soon as Willie was fired it took longer.
He also suffered a hip injury or something which probably sapped some of his power. and he was getting really unlucky early in the season.
I doubt that Delgado simply wasn’t trying for Willie. I think it was a major coincidence. The man was on a contract year, after all. He was finally healing from wrist surgery. Coincedences happen all the time, and you should take them with a large grain of salt.
Chemistry is certainly not a bad thing, but when acquiring players, chemistry should be the last thing in mind. How a team works mentally is beyond the control of a GM. Maybe you get a great guy who’s a hard-nosed player, etc etc. That’s all well and good, but think about this:
A) Let’s say the guy’s so nice people think he’s a freakin’ messiah, but one day David Wright rubs him the wrong way and the chemsitry’s ruined. What then?
B) What if you have a choice between a great player with a less-than-perfect makeup and and average player who was a punter in college and is gritty etc. etc. Will you take Average Joe instead of the great player?
C) Great teams win World Series’s because they’re either great teams or by happenstance get really hot. The reason the Cards won the 2006 World Series wasn’t David Eckstein, Mr. Hard Nose, but rather Albert Pujols, Mr. Great Player. The Yankees won the 2001 World Series more by having Roger Clemens than they did having Derek Jeter and his work ethic.
D) You can’t quantify chemistry. If it were as easy and important to build team chemistry, maybe Bill James would’ve stumbled upon that a few years ago. Imagine this:
Omar: I see Vlad has a Chem rating of 6.7…
Tony B: But Juan Rivera’s chem rating is off the charts at 9.5! He’ll surely be able the help the team win, and he’s cheaper!
Regis, although what you say is all well and good, it’s not the direction we should be taking.
Fair point, it is nearly impossible to quantify, but I just wish the team showed more solidarity. It would have made at least a one game difference the last two seasons imo.
That’s more in the hands of the manager and how he runs his team. Also a “team mentality” is rare to come by because of all the psychological components. While it’s entertaining, it may not be the secret to winning.
Regis,
Can you honestly say that team chemistry is why Luis Ayala gave up a 3-run homer to Greg Norton? Why Billy Wagner blew 3 saves in a week in June? Why David Wright couldn’t hit a sac fly against the Cubs? Why Scott Schoeneweis gave up a home run to Wes Helms on Sept. 28?
Additionally, if the 2008 Rays had so much chemistry (which led to winning) where was this chemistry/winning in 2007 when they had nearly the same roster (save Longoria, Garza, Floyd)?
This is brilliant.
Their chemistry alone propelled the Phillies into the throngs of baseball legend. Jimmy Rollins couldn’t turn a double play until he met Chase Utley, who couldn’t hit until he had Ryan Howard protecting him in the order, who couldn’t field until he knew in his heart of hearts that Cole Hamels would make it to that bag. And Cole Hamels! He couldn’t pitch until he ran into the platoon of Ruiz and Coste! Nothing screams chem-is-try like a platoon! Without that platoon, Brad Lidge would have blown 30 games, but he might have blown 15 more if it wasn’t for Shane Victorino in center! Screw you Aaron Rowand you are the reason this team lost last year!!! ARGHHHHHHHHH!!!
Funny that you bring up Rowand. This is the type of player people call a gamer, the perfect hard-nosed, blue collar guy that would do great in Philly. What happens? They .let him go and win it all.
You just can’t go after guys you think are gamers. If Byrnes comes here and gets hurt, well, what was the point?
Put the best guys you can get at every position and hope by luck that they are firing from several cylinders at all times, especially when it comes down the stretch.
Knowing the Mets, Wright, Reyes and Beltran will have phenomenal Septembers and Santana will give up 7 runs on the last day of the season. Sounds crule, but would you really be that suprised?
I think ludichrisspeed was being sarcastic.
Thanks Gina, I know he was. It was a segue into a point I wanted to make.
I don’t believe as much in finding winning players who are gamers, etc.
There is so much luck and having the right timing in baseball.
This is why the Mets cannot give up on Wright and Reyes (as long as his head is in the game).
The media made so much of the Met core not being gamers and being chokers. BUT, the Phillies players went through many prolonged slumps. Burrell was essentially zero the 2nd half of the season and Utley dissapeared for 2-3 months. Rollins and Howard carried them into the playoffs but were hot and mostly cold in the playoffs. The difference is they always had a couple guys going at one time.
Unfortunately Wright and Reyes have stuggled at the wrong times the last 2 years, but this is bound to even out.
Of course you need the backup/supplemental players to be solid. This was Victorino and Werth, (and coste during the playoffs). For the Mets all this yr it was Tatis, Easley and to an extent Church, but all were hurt down the stretch. They weren’t able to compensate because the stars weren’t on all cylinders.
Same thing with the Rays. So much was made of Upton and Longoria being gamers, but they did NOTHING in the WS. Neither did Pena. So are they gamers or not? There weren’t those 2-3 solid position players to keep things going while the stars figured it out.
Of course some guys feel more comfy in the clutch than others. But with many players it’s simply about timing and some luck as far as a few guys getting hot at the right times.
I think we need to upgrade the non-stars (catcher, 2nd, corners) so that the bench guys can be bench guys. When they have to fill in and then got hurt, this killed the team.
I agree and have been saying this the whole off-season. There is nothing wrong with the core, it’s the crap we’ve surrounded the core with. You really can’t expect to go far when, for most of the season, before the rookies were called up, you have no offense coming off the bench, because Tatis was forced into a starting role, and essentially are starting 3 guys who hit like pitchers, or worse, in your line-up, Castillo/Easley/Awful Reyes at some points Marlon Anderson, Schneider and of course the actual pitcher. Especially when your team is as defensively poor as we were last year. IMO the only guys from the bench, excluding the rookies and I’m not counting Awful Reyes as a rookie. Are Tatis, Castro and Chavez.
“Team chemistry” doesn’t make you get hits or strike guys out. Talent does. In baseball, give me stats over team chemistry any day. Not so for basketball, football, hockey. These are true team sports. Baseball is very nearly as individual as a sport can be while still being played in teams.
Talent.
Talent.
Talent.
Baseball is a team sport in its own respect. It’s so unique from other sports it’s almost impossible to compare.
winning makes good chemistry.
I still cannot understand how 2 years in a row our bullpen
blew it so meticulously..I am not a conspracy theorist but
it’s looked like the guys were getting paid to blow it,
not paid or pride to win.
the fact that one guy in our pen could not “step up”
and take care of business astounds me. We know our pitchers
have talent.
I still can’t think of the last two years without awe of the insane
collapses.
“Chemistry” in 2009 will be defined as to what clubhouse in MLB has the best new undetectable HGH.