Apr 24, 2014; New York, NY, USA; New York Mets second baseman Daniel Murphy (28) celebrates with teammates after defeating the St. Louis Cardinals at Citi Field. Mandatory Credit: Robert Deutsch-USA TODAY Sports

These Mets Are Fun To Watch


Friday night, the Mets rallied in the bottom of the 9th to score two runs and defeat the Miami Marlins. It was the Mets’ third win in a row, and they’ve won five of their last six. The team’s record stands at 13-10 on the young season. The fan base seems to agree that while this team is not a powerhouse, it’s fun to watch. Here are a few reasons why.

1. They don’t really hit, but they win. The Mets are winning, yet the team’s offense has been sputtering since opening day. Some relevant examples- David Wright is batting .284, but the captain has only 1 home run, and a total of 3 extra-base hits. Curtis Granderson is batting .141 with 1 home run. Chris Young is batting .182 with 1 home run. These players were supposed to drive the offense. Yet, the Mets find ways to win. They scrap for offense in an exciting way. They build their runs as a team. Eric Young Junior, though he’s batting just .225, has an OBP of .337 with 11 stolen bases and 19 runs scored. Anthony Recker, though batting just .227, has won an extra-inning game with a home run. On April 25th, Omar Quintanilla, the light-hitting Omar Quintanilla, delivered a clutch game-tying single in the ninth. The contributions are coming in small doses, from unlikely sources.

2. They are eclectic. The Mets are a strange amalgamation of youth and veterans. They rely on young starters (Jenrry Mejia, Zack Wheeler), yet employ the soon-to-be 41-year-old (and oddly shaped) Bartolo Colon. This week, they added 40-year-old Bobby Abreu to the bench, and Abreu did not even play last year. Further balancing the age scale is catcher Travis d’Arnaud at age 24, and shortstop Ruben Tejada also 24 years old. The controversial Matt Harvey keeps things lively, even though he’s missing the entire season, by showing up at New York Rangers’ games. The team’s general manager has taken to Twitter, with club and self-deprecating humor. One doesn’t see that often in professional sports.

3. They have a bright future. Most Mets fans know that this may not be “the year”. They realize that in order to contend, moves will be necessary (upgrading shortstop tops the list). However, with a starting rotation that has posted an ERA of close to 1.80 over the last 11 games, and possibly better pitching on the way, it’s reasonable for the customers to start to get excited about what may be a very promising future. Talk of Rafael Montero, Noah Syndergaard, and Cesar Puello, (among others) helps provide encouragement during the inevitable struggles that accompany a 162-game season.

The Mets have their flaws. Their roughly $85 million payroll has been the subject of public ridicule. However, the important part is that so far, the team has played respectable, fun baseball. They have been exciting. They have the pieces in place to put a sustainable, competitive product on the field for years to come. As fans, what more could we really ask for?

 

Thanks for reading! Be sure to follow@RisingAppleBlog on Twitter and Instagram, and Like Rising Apple’s Facebook page to keep up with the latest news, rumors, and opinion.

 

Next Mets Game View full schedule »
Tuesday, Sep 22 Sep7:10at Miami MarlinsBuy Tickets

Tags: Bartolo Colon Curtis Granderson Omar Quintanilla

  • Donald Arner

    What more could we ask for? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? This “team” is a damn joke! How long do you really think they can keep winning games like they do? How long do you think the starters can keep up the ERA of 1.80? C’mon man,get serious!This team NEEDS HITTING,your not going to win 81 games like this,and there is NO HITTING HELP even close in the minors……NONE! When you have to sign a washed up 40 year old to play on your team,you have big problems!!! And by the way,before anybody asks,I AM A METS FAN,A DISGUSTED ONE!

  • Jack Strawb

    It’s odd that someone writing as a long time fan of the team and game seems entirely unaware of Pythagorean wins. The Mets have been outscored, and are only not 11-12 due to plain luck.

    11 and 12 isn’t bad for a team with one of the lowest payrolls in the majors, and the worst ownership in the majors, but it doesn’t portend anything other than the roughly 77 win team that the club as constructed surely is.

    This team isn’t going to be any more fun to watch than any other sub-.500 team. They don’t run particularly well. Except through luck they aren’t going to win more than their share of close or extra inning games by timely hitting, or (non-existent) clutch relief performances.

    Don’t take this the wrong way, but if you’re going to write about baseball, why not take it seriously, and learn how games are in fact won and lost?

    • Rich S

      Perhaps you can enlighten me (since I’m “entirely unaware”) on a few things. First, where did I suggest that the type of winning the Mets are experiencing is sustainable? Or that it implies any number of wins? I simply said it’s fun to watch, a point with which you’re welcome to disagree. Second, I didn’t know that divisions, league champions, and World Series champions are determined by Pythagorean wins. I thought it was by wins and losses on the field. Should we then invalidate, say the 1960 World Series, where the Yankees significantly outscored the Pirates, yet lost the series? Should we have two representations of the standings, one with “real” wins and losses, and the other with Pythagorean wins and losses? Then we can flip a coin to see which one counts that year for post-season considerations? Pythagorean formulas are predictive. However, last I checked, reality is what determines winners and losers.