Huzzah for David Wright

You know, in this sort of season you've got to take your triumphs where you can get them.

Like with David Wright, who all of a sudden is going to end this season with (some of) the kind of numbers we're comfortable with.

It was a drag for me as a fan to have to defend/talk about Wright's horrid 2009, when, amazingly, he hit only 10 home runs and drove in 72 runs.

Coming into 2010, Wright had all of a sudden become a bit of a question mark. Could he hit at Citi Field? Was he happy as a Met? And, worst of all, had he been a juicer? Just a lot of uncomfortable questions all around.

Yesterday, Wright put a few of those questions to bed by socking his 28th home run (11th at home), and collecting his 100th RBI.

Those numbers at least are a reminder of the early D-Wright, the guy from 2005-2006 who was coming into his own. Maybe he needed a year like that again to get back to the 2007-2008 vintage.

Indeed, while the HR and RBI numbers are back where we want them, other numbers are not. Everyone knows about the franchise-record number of strikeouts, and his slugging percentage (.504) and OBP (.356) are also far off from his career norms.

On another player that might not be alarming, but Wright was the kind of talent that you expected to only get better through his prime years (beginning next year).

But here's to optimism! I'm saying he just needed a year to collect himself, a year to dust himself off after the horrible 2009 campaign. I'm expecting big things from him in 2011. I think he's back.

- A.F.O.M.G.

What Does the Phillies' Dynasty Mean for the Mets?

A question that occurred as I caught the end of Loudmouths on SNY: if the Phillies are a dynasty with a few years left in them, what does that mean for decision-makers with the Mets?

With Roy Halladay, Roy Oswalt, and Cole Hamels leading their rotation, and Ryan Howard and Chase Utley powering their offense for years to come, is it even possible for the Mets to field a team that should win the division any time before, say, 2013?

Of course, there's always the chance of injury or Father Time interrupting their best-laid plans. But in lieu of that, what's the Mets' best strategy, hope?

I don't mean to sound defeatist (I feel like I've been saying that a lot lately...), but if you're the Mets and you're up against that kind of team in Philly, you need to give a lot of thought as to how you can best allocate your resources.

Normally you might say, well, if we can just make it into the playoffs, then you never know what'll happen. That's true enough, but any team entering a postseason with Halladay-Oswalt-Hamels is going to be the favorite in any series.

The question I'm posing then is if the best you can realistically hope for is to be the Wild Card winner, first, and then enter the playoffs as a long shot, second, is it worth doing that at a cost of ~$130mm in payroll? Is it worth retaining guys who will have peaked by 2013 (that year's a bit arbitrary, but go with it for the sake of argument)?

Lot of hard questions facing our Metsies, not a lot of easy answers.

- A.F.O.M.G.

Behind Enemy Lines

Until this past weekend my exposure to the city of Philadelphia had been pretty limited.

I visited once when I was a senior in high school; Y2K godfather Sippy Momo was a fiery first-year at what would come to be called "The U."

I wouldn't return for 8 or 9 years, and when I did, it was only for a few hours for Lister's bachelor party earlier this year. That excursion provided my introduction to Citizens Bank Park, but it didn't give me anything in the way of a sense for what Philly itself is all about.

After spending four days there it's probably an exaggeration to say I've got the city all figured out, but I did see enough of it to have a somewhat informed opinion. On the whole I have a very favorable impression.

Little Miss Citi and I stayed in the center city area, a very pleasant part of town that's home to good restaurants and bars, but quite a ways from Independence Center (Hall?) where the Liberty Bell is. In any event, I got a consistent vibe that I could live there if I ever needed to leave New York, which puts Philly on a very short list.

Of course, there were negatives too. First off, WOW are there are a lot of homeless people in Philadelphia! And crazy ones at that... we saw one homeless person who had the Joker makeup on his mouth. Also, I don't get cities where the cabbies don't have a consistent light-on/light-off policy like they do in New York... it could all be so simple!

A major issue for me, however, was the incredibly self-conscious feeling I had walking around town in my Mets hat. Maybe it was just because the Mets were in town, but I received a number of "Mets suck" taunts going from place to place (and then, god knows, when we went to CBP Saturday night).

We had awesome seats for the game, better than any I've ever had at Citi Field, actually, and they won, so it was an altogether positive experience. There's a little part of me that wanted the Mets to watch the Phillies celebrate another division crown, but if I'm honest, I'm glad I wasn't there/in Philly to see it.

It's a town that loves its baseball team. Of course, it's easy to love a team that's really good and makes the World Series every year, but as you walk around and see everyone in Philly red (along with some blue, maroon, and even green), you do get a bit envious. I suppose that's the difference between a one-team town and a two-team town.

Anyway, by the end of the weekend we were both sorry to leave. We had one last reminder of Philadelphia baseball on our way out of town, however.

A big guy with mangy hair and a goatee walked by, and I said, "whoa, that's Jayson Werth." A woman behind us pointed to the team bus and sure enough, all of a sudden the train station was flooded with Phillies. The locals cheered. I scowled. It was a fitting end to the weekend.

- A.F.O.M.G.

On Joe Torre

Hey team, sorry for the lack of posts this week, just been caught up on some things at work and with business school applications.

I did want to take a moment to comment briefly on the Joe Torre situation. It probably goes without saying, but I couldn't be happier that he has officially backed out of the running for the skipper job with the Mets next season.

The last thing I want to see the Mets do is hire somebody who is so closely identified with a rival. It was tough, all those years, rooting for Tom Glavine; sure, you suck it up and do it when he's wearing your colors, but there's a little part of you that never forgets all the wars you've been through with that guy on the other side of the diamond.

Torre would have been a daily reminder of not just 2000, but of the nearly 15 years of Yankee dominance in this town.

Beyond that, we need someone who is in it for the long haul. I wouldn't want the Mets to start building something good and then all of a sudden lose their manager for no other reason than that he wanted to retire.

When he was fired by the Yankees, Casey Stengel said he'd never make the mistake of turning 70 again. He was still a damn good manager at the time. We don't want to be agist when it comes to Torre; if he can manage he can manage. But you really have to wonder: how many years does he have left?

He thought about retiring once, he's thinking about it again, why should we assume he has anything more than 3 years left in him?

It would be one thing if the Mets were knocking on the door, but we all know it's more likely that we're 2-3 years away from being serious contenders again (in a best case scenario).

I'd rather see us hire someone who can cultivate our young talent and grow alongside it. I don't know who that person is (Bobby V? Wally Backman?), but I don't think it's Torre.

It's not just a matter of finding a good manager, you have to find the right guy at the right time. Safe to say Joe Torre isn't that guy.

- A.F.O.M.G.

Is the Dream of 2011 Dead?

Per Metsblog, yesterday's loss formally eliminated the Mets from contention in the NL East. It's a matter of days before the same happens in the Wild Card race.

My expectations for the 2010 season were never particularly high. Sure, there was that moment in mid-June when the team was 11 games over .500 and I really believed in them, but as they slid back to mediocrity I accepted it. The team had played over its head and it was reverting to the mean. That's what 162 games will do to you.

But 162 games can do something else to you, too: they can sap your enthusiasm for the next 162 in one instant. For the Mets, that instant was when Johan Santana sustained a torn capsule in his shoulder.

I had hoped that 2010 would be a redux of 2005, a steppingstone type of season into a brighter tomorrow. But between Santana's injury, which could keep him sidelined throughout 2011, and the Wilpons' bizarrely unknowable financial situation, it seems incredibly unlikely that the Mets will have the motivation or resources to make the kind of high impact moves that would make them legitimate contenders for the division crown in 2011.

I hate to sound so defeatist, but it's not even worth trying. With Santana on the shelf and question marks around the diamond, there are too many holes to fill and too few dollars to fill them with.

What does that mean for 2011? It means it's another year like this one; a season of development and, hopefully, long-term growth.

It means the team shouldn't add a dime to its payroll in the offseason. What's the point? Let guys like Dillon Gee, Josh Thole, Jenrry Mejija, and on and on get a full year in the big leagues under their belts. Then try to make the high impact moves when the contracts of Beltran, K-Rod, Castillo, etc. finally come off the books after 2011.

Between guys like Mike Pelfrey, Jon Niese, and Ike Davis (not to mention David Wright and Jose Reyes), the Mets might actually have a home-grown core of players to build something special around.

But they're not going to be world beaters overnight, and certainly not in 2011. There are still kinks those guys, especially Niese and Davis, will work through next season.

And that's OK. It's OK to be long-term greedy, and that's exactly what the Mets should be. The strategy from here on out should be to focus on 2012. If the Mets play their cards right and a few things break their way, there's no reason they can't be legitimate contenders that season.

And then, who knows, maybe they win the World Series and the world ends later that year because of some Mayan calendar thing. That sounds about right.

Enjoy your Sunday, everyone. First softball game of the season -- let's go!

- A.F.O.M.G.

Braves or Phils? An Unfamiliar Dilemma

With the Braves and Phillies fighting down to the wire for the division crown, Mets fans are faced with an unfamiliar dilemma: who to root for?

This isn't quite as unsavory a question as the one presented by last year's "Bad Meets Evil" World Series between the Yankees and Phillies, but that's small comfort. There's also nothing saying both teams won't find themselves playing October baseball; the second-place Braves currently hold a .5 game lead over the Padres for the Wild Card lead.

But we like to think about these things around here so who are we rooting for, the Braves or the Phillies?

For me it's an easy answer: I'm rooting for the Braves. The 17-year-old me would never believe his ears, but then, he hasn't seen what I've seen.

It's been a long time since the Mets-Braves rivalry of the late '90s. The only remaining active Met or Brave with first-hand experience of the rivalry, Chipper Jones, is on the shelf, and perhaps done for his career. The Phillies still march the same team out there that broke our hearts two years running.

I'd love it more than anything if, for all their Roy Halladay and Roy Oswalt, they could just miss the playoffs this year. That would be nice.

To do it, the Braves are gonna have to start winning again. Am I above hoping the Mets take a dive this weekend? No.

That's mostly a joke; I still want the Mets to finish strong and if they're part of an equation that means the Braves don't play October baseball, well, there's satisfaction to be had in that.

But priority number one for me is keeping the Phillies out of the dance. Are you with me or against me?

- A.F.O.M.G.

The Least Surprising News Ever

Stop! We interrupt your normal broadcasting day for some breaking news -- Yankee fans are criminals. The New York Times has gotten off its ass and starting reporting the news that we, the people, were already quite familiar with. Take it away, Manny.

A curious phenomenon has emerged at the intersection of fashion, sports and crime: dozens of men and women who have robbed, beaten, stabbed and shot at their fellow New Yorkers have done so while wearing Yankees caps or clothing.

No mention of Randy Levine, but I'm sure that's coming later in the article. Proceed.

But Yankees caps and clothing have dominated the crime blotter for so long, in so many parts of the city and in so many types of offenses, that it defies an easy explanation. Criminologists, sports marketing analysts, consumer psychologists and Yankees fans have developed their own theories, with some attributing the trend to the popularity of the caps among gangsta rappers and others wondering whether criminals are identifying with the team’s aura of money, power and success.

No easy explanation? Fah. Like Chris Rock said, "Whatever happened to crazy?" Yankee Fan is just a lunatic, that's all.

“It’s a shame,” said Chuck Frantz, 57, the president of the 430-member Lehigh Valley Yankee Fan Club in Pennsylvania. “It makes us Yankees fans look like criminals, because of a few unfortunate people who probably don’t know the first thing about the Yankees.”

Cough ** criminal owner ** cough.

The Yankees organization declined to comment for this article.

Oh I'll be they did. Which is a shame. I was hoping for at the very least a little Baghdad Bob-style fun. "Yankee fans are good upstanding citizens. It is the New York Times that attacked us with their cruise missiles." Etc.

One criminologist said the trend might be a result of what could be called the Jay-Z effect.

Uh oh.

The rapper Jay-Z has worn a Yankees cap for years — on his album covers and in his videos — and has helped turn the cap into a ubiquitous fashion accessory for urban youths (“I made the Yankee hat more famous than a Yankee can,” he boasts in one song).

I do not like where this is going.

Criminals might be wearing Yankees merchandise not because they are fans of the team, but because they are fans of the cocked-hat look popularized by Jay-Z and other rappers, said the criminologist, Frankie Y. Bailey, an associate professor at the University at Albany, who is writing a book about the role of clothing and style in criminal case.

“He wears it and makes it look cool,” Ms. Bailey said of Jay-Z and the cap. “It’s almost like the Yankees have acquired a kind of street rep, a coolness.”

How dare you blame Young Hov for these tragic circumstances, sir. Have you no decency? No decency at long last? And besides, Jay-Z really doesn't really have that much connection with the ...

Jay-Z, Eminem Joined By Kanye West, Beyonce, Others at Yankee Stadium

Crap.

Thankfully, the article helpfully clarifies that this whole Yankee crime wave long predates "Big Pimpin'."

And Yankees caps hold a distinguished place in the annals of crime: the man who robbed more banks than anyone else in American history wore one. Edwin Chambers Dodson, known as the Yankee Bandit because he wore a Yankees cap and sunglasses during most of his holdups, robbed 72 banks in Southern California in the early 1980s and the late 1990s.

Ah, closure. To sum up for the kids, Yankee fans are armed, usually with incredibly foul body odor, and are extremely dangerous. They're out looking for easy marks, and they have no scruples to speak of. They might let Mariano hang onto his wallet, but he's basically the only one. Don't yourself become the next Kenny Williams.

- Cheddar Ben

Promises, Promises

Hey team, one of these days I'm gonna get blue in the face saying this, but sorry for the lack of posts lately. The business school application process is in full swing. Things should ease up by next month at which point I promise to come back with a vengeance, but until then my posting will probably be pretty spotty.

Part of the reason is I simply haven't had time to watch the boys play lately. I'm aware that Dillon Gee has two solid starts under his belt, but I couldn't tell you anything about him.

Over dinner last night I caught some of Pregame Live on SNY, where Kevin Burkhardt was interviewing a player I thought was Gee... turned out it was Lucas Duda, another new face I generally know nothing about.

I do know that everyone's favoring aspiring ball man, R.A. Dickey, man of letters, tossed another gem last night, albeit against the lowly Pirates. It's been said a million times over, but in this disappointing season, Dickey has been a really great storyline.

I hope he can provide more of the same next year, not only because it would help the Mets, but because I really like what I know about Dickey as a person.

I think it's awesome that he's an erstwhile professor of English, and that he dreams of being a ball man at the US Open. I appreciate his thoughtful post-game commentary.

I hope he slides in there and occupies the same space that Rick Reed dominated once upon a time.

As for the Mets more broadly, with a win tonight they can even out their record at 73-73. As I've said before, I really want them to finish the season strong, and somewhere in the 1-4 games over .500 range should be doable.

You say it's not possible? Well hey, don't look now but there are 17 games left on the schedule. If Mets fans know anything it's how much things can change in 17 games.

And on that pleasant note... until next time.

- A.F.O.M.G.

Is There a Light at the End of the Tunnel?

When I left for my end-of-summer vacation on Martha's Vineyard last Sunday, a lot of things were different with the Mets.

For one thing, I felt like I still understood the roster. But now that the youth movement is fully underway, I look at the lineup each day and have no idea who a lot of these people are.

The main question, which I'll start to figure out in the coming days, has been whether the new names are legitimate prospects or career minor leaguers who are here to help the Mets play out the string.

Speaking of playing out the string, the Mets are officially out of the playoff discussion, which presents us with the question of whether to root for the respectability conferred by wins or the higher draft picks promised by losses.

The Mets currently have the 12th worst record in baseball. Of the 11 teams with worse records today, 5 of them (Baltimore, Cleveland, Seattle, Pittsburgh, and Arizona) will almost certainly finish the season with worse records than the Mets, meaning the best we can hope for is the 6th pick in the draft.

Judging from the standings, however, there are only two teams the Mets are "competing" with in their race for a better draft pick: Houston and Milwaukee. The Mets could very conceivably finish with a worse record than those two teams. If you're rooting for draft picks, root for those two teams to get hot and the Mets to tank the rest of the way.

As for me, I'm not rooting in that direction. Not out of principle, mind you; god knows that last year I rooted for losses. This isn't last year, however, and I still think the Mets have a chance to turn 2010 into a long-term positive.

As so many things this year have, the Mets' current situation reminds me of 2005. With the team struggling in the waning weeks of that season, Willie Randolph challenged his team to finish strong and end the season on a positive note. The team responded to his message and finished the year 83-79.

I'd love to see a similar finish this year, mostly because I still think this team can compete in 2011 and I put a lot of stock in organizational momentum. A dreadful finish to 2010 wouldn't serve the narrative the team is going for. (It's the difference between entering Spring Training with the storyline being about team that had a middling 2010 and was hoping to take the next step in 2011, rather than a team that was awful in 2010 and could they possibly be good in 2011 -- a big difference to my mind.)

To finish 83-79 this year, the Mets would have to go 16-8 down the stretch. First off, wow, there are only 24 games left -- how did that happen? Second, 16-8 seems almost impossible for this team to manage, but stranger things have happened, I suppose.

I think finishing with a respectable record is the only light at the end of the tunnel for the Metsies. If they completely blow it the rest of the way, 2010 will just feel like a total loss, and that's not what we need. We need to show the baseball world, and the fan base, that there is reason to believe in the Mets.

- A.F.O.M.G.

Did Jeff Francoeur Kill Matt Cerrone's Puppy?

I mean, what is the deal with Cerrone and Jeff Francoeur?

It's like, we get it, you didn't think he was much of a ballplayer.

There is CLEARLY something beyond baseball here. My theory is that Francoeur, the darling of media outlets everywhere, must have snubbed Cerrone at some point. Maybe Frnechy didn't give him the time of day because he's a blogger or something.

Whatever it was, I'm making a plea for Cerrone and Metsblog more generally to get over it with Jeff Francoeur. The idea that he was the guy who sunk this team is absurd, and I'm willing to bet the team hung on to him as long as they did because of his friendship with David Wright (a complete guess on my part).

Anyway, the level of antagonism they're directing toward him is just really unnecessary; unprofessional in my opinion.

Enough already.

- A.F.O.M.G.