The New York Mets 2021 season has been anything but a smooth ride so far, and the events of the last week or so haven't changed that. After dropping the first game of a doubleheader to the St. Louis Cardinals on Wednesday, the Mets were sitting at 11-13 on the season. They were looking little like the potential playoff team we all hoped for after a solid offseason. The idea of that club going on a 5-game winning streak seemed quite remote.
They hadn't managed to win more than 2 games in a row since mid-April, had fired their hitting coaches, and were enduring prolonged slumps from some of their key players. Even the boost from winning the last two games of the Cardinals series coincided with receiving the bad news that the return of starter Carlos Carrasco would be delayed. And the 5th win in the streak cost the Mets the services of Jacob deGrom for at least 10 days.
Last week also prominently featured a phantom "hitting approach coach" who turned out to be the alter ego of Pete Alonso and an emergence of a rat/raccoon hybrid — a legendary animal who made an appearance to ask Francisco Lindor and Jeff McNeil that age-old question, "why can't we all just get along?" Yet somehow, through all of the turbulence, the Mets have managed to play their best ball of the season while teasing the possibility of better things to come.
Every season has its ups and downs, of course, and its signature moments of craziness. But the first 29 games of the 2021 season have been quite the rollercoaster ride for the Mets. The last few days were just the cherry on top of the sundae. A portion of my mind craves some clarity on how real the chances are for a Mets playoff run this fall, but it's going to continue to have to wait for any sort of decisive answer. For now, I content myself that the Mets seem to be figuring some stuff out, and that's always the foundation for eventual success.
While I was thinking all of this over last night, I came across a scolding piece in the New York Post by Joel Sherman, under a headline warning the Mets that they needed to "prove" their dysfunction was in the past. And I'm sorry, I genuinely like Sherman as a baseball writer, but I thought his efforts to drag Wilpon era dysfunction into the story was just a lazy, tired take on recent events:
As long as the deGrom injury is just a start or two, the Mets stand with the Braves for the most talent and depth in the NL East; perhaps even more. They lead the tightly packed division, and could and probably should win it.
Yet, these are the Mets, which serves as shorthand to explain dysfunction amid just one division title and two playoff appearances since 2006. It is what holds back a firm embrace of these Mets as the NL East team to beat. Steve Cohen has badly wanted to distance that past, pumping millions into personnel and systems to try to play catch up. But are Cohen and his lieutenants getting a honeymoon they have yet to earn? After all, how would the past few months have been received and covered if the Wilpons still ran the team?
God, I really hate this stuff. The oft-discussed dysfunction of the Wilpon years wasn't some sort of chronic disease that caused the Mets problems. Those were a lack of vision, chronic poor decision-making, and a failure of leadership at the top. The outward-facing dysfunction was just the pus oozing out of the wounds. Pardon the gross analogy.
Steve Cohen "pumping millions into personnel and systems" was a great start at overcoming years of neglect and poor decision making. It's not going to fix everything that's wrong all at once, but the willingness to invest in building up the club's infrastructure is a very positive step on the road to more predictable future success. I can't speak for anyone else, but my recognition of this commitment is the reason why Cohen and his lieutenants have earned a honeymoon with me.
I already wrote a piece earlier this week laying out why I was fine with replacing the hitting coaches. I don't care that they didn't wait for an off day to do it, as some in the media suggested. However, the Mets did make an unforced error in failing to inform the team of the change before it came out in the media. I doubt Steve Cohen was happy about that. Nor should he have been. That was a really lame mistake by the front office that shouldn't be allowed to happen again.
I thought Lindor's creation of the rat story was an unfortunate attempt to deflect with humor that was ill-advised, but ultimately forgivable. The guy is 27. People don't always make perfect decisions at that age. If some writers are still upset at his awkward handling of the matter, it's up to Francisco to work it out with them. Alienating folks who cover the team is always something to be avoided, if possible.
Putting aside all of the noise and getting down to the signal, I hope the Mets have righted the ship somewhat and are on the path to more consistent play. I guess we'll see how that plays out. However, if the Mets don't compete strongly for the playoffs, it won't be because "these are the Mets" is some sort of shorthand for dysfunction. If Joel Sherman is paid to provide solid baseball analysis to the rest of us, he stole whatever percent of his paycheck contributed to that dysfunctional failure of an article. Sorry, but saying, "thus it has always been; thus it always will be" carries all of the intellectual heft of an old Bazooka Joe comic strip.
3 comments:
I'd disagree with Sherman, Mets' depth is head and shoulders above the Braves' in my opinion. Especially in the bullpen.
I am dysfunctional. My team is too. A match made in heaven.
Don't worry, Tom. I hear there's a pill for that.
Aidan, Sherman wasn't even trying to say the Braves were a better team than the Mets. That was the most annoying part of his article.
Post a Comment