Mike's Mets - 98 Pound Weaklings

 

By Mike Steffanos

I mentioned in yesterday's post that a really hectic week kept me away from watching the two games our New York Mets played against the Red Sox this week. I guess someone on the Mets noticed. Last night they "treated" me with a game that was essentially a replay of their anemic 2-game set against Boston. Apparently, they didn't read the second sentence of that paragraph where I mentioned that I had no regrets about missing those games. Not that it would really matter, anyway, as the Mets have been losing a version of that same game since the season got underway.

After 50+ years of following baseball, I believe in having patience with my team. The season lasts for six months, and the only thing that matters is the win-loss record when those 162 games are in the books. It's easy to look at a piece of the season and attach too much weight to it, particularly at the beginning. I also feel like the Mets deserved some slack for the disjointed nature of the first two-and-a-half weeks between rainouts and the Nationals' COVID-19 outbreak. Now, without looking to completely discount that as a factor in their slow start, it's hard to overlook the fact that they've only managed to score 58 runs over their first 20 games. Honestly, it's a miracle that the Mets have managed to win 9 of those contests.

The calendar has turned over to May, with a presumption that the weather will continue to warm up and give the offense a lift. The Mets aren't alone in failing to put runs on the board. It's endemic across the sport so far. In fairness, it's also true that if the Mets had caught a few breaks in the early going, they might have a few more wins. Things wouldn't look quite so bleak if they were 11-9 rather than 9-11. 

On the other hand, if they didn't get some terrific pitching, they could have lost a few more and would be in really rough shape. The brand of baseball they're playing has often been quite tedious to watch — particularly on offense, where unproductive inning follows after unproductive inning while the games inexplicably still drag on forever. When I started watching baseball, a 2-1 game wouldn't take much more than a couple of hours to play. It only feels like extra torture when it drags on well over 3 hours as it did last night.

I know some people believe that the testiness in last night's game might wake up the Mets. I'd love to believe that, or in anything, really, that would end this offensive torpor. I'm not really buying into that, however. I think the Mets built an offense that is somewhat dependent on hitting home runs to score, and the fact that they've only hit 15 out in these first 20 games is a huge factor in their scoring woes. Hitting a few out of the park would do more to spark the Mets than another silly baseball fight with the Phillies.

Assuming that the balls start flying a bit further, the Mets will undoubtedly score more runs at some point in the near future. I really can't believe that Michael Conforto, Dominic Smith, Jeff McNeil, Francisco Lindor, and Kevin Pillar are going to continue slumping as a group the way they have been. However, what this team might be by the end of the season is still very much a mystery to me. I can see the bones of a strong contender, but I also see the possibility of an underperforming group that follows the script they did in April: win a few, lose a few, hang around the .500 mark and leave us all wondering why they never really clicked.

If that latter scenario plays out, it could spell the end for quite a few people in the organization. One who would almost certainly go would be manager Luis Rojas. Presumably, some or all of the coaches would follow him out the door. I can't say that I'd be particularly happy or sad if Rojas left. I believe the idea that a Major League manager can get more out of a team by "lighting a fire under their asses" is overrated. If a player needs an ass-kicking to perform at this level, he probably doesn't belong in the majors.

Continue reading by clicking here.