PDA

View Full Version : New York Mets


cbotnyse
06-14-2006, 07:02 PM
are these guys for real? they certainly seem like it so far......I believe they lead the NL in ERA and batting average.

If it came down to a Mets vs. Sox WS would we match up well?

HomeFish
06-14-2006, 07:09 PM
If it came down to a Mets vs. Sox WS would we match up well?

Not in Game 1 or 5, I can tell you that much. Not until like the 8th inning, that is.

cws05champ
06-14-2006, 10:49 PM
Contreras vs Pedro
Buerhle vs Glavine
Garcia vs Trachsel
Garland/Vazquez vs El Duque

I'd take our chances with our Starters against theirs at the end of the year. They have a good lineup up and down...this series would not be a cake walk. I think home field for the Sox would be big in this series considering Thome would not get to hit in the NL park.

Banix12
06-14-2006, 11:48 PM
They are a very good team but I think it's very hard to say how good any team in the NL is right now since the league as a whole seems very weak.

Especially in the NL East where you have the Mets beating up on a lot of struggling teams. None of the other teams in that divison are pitching particularly well, the Braves having quite a bit of trouble in that department. And actually that division has three teams near the bottom in team batting average with Florida, Philadelphia and Washington.

They are the kings of what is currently a lousy division in a weaker league so certainly their 40-23 record might be a bit inflated.

DSpivack
06-15-2006, 12:36 AM
I don't think the Mets are that good. Pedro and Glavine are undeniably future HOFers and not pitching bad at all this year, but Steve Trachsel and El Duque are their #3 and #4? And that's supposed to be a World Series contender? This just proves how weak the NL is.

HotelWhiteSox
06-15-2006, 12:49 AM
Not in Game 1 or 5, I can tell you that much. Not until like the 8th inning, that is.

You still have to play the game. See Clemens in Game 1

PKalltheway
06-15-2006, 01:35 AM
Hey, we took down Roger Clemens, Andy Petitte, Roy Oswalt, and closer Brad Lidge in the World Series. Nothing more needs to be said.:D:

JorgeFabregas
06-15-2006, 01:41 AM
I think they are for real in the sense that they will make the playoffs and likely win a round or two.

RKMeibalane
06-15-2006, 10:10 AM
Not in Game 1 or 5, I can tell you that much. Not until like the 8th inning, that is.

:rolleyes:

RKMeibalane
06-15-2006, 10:11 AM
I don't think the Mets are that good. Pedro and Glavine are undeniably future HOFers and not pitching bad at all this year, but Steve Trachsel and El Duque are their #3 and #4? And that's supposed to be a World Series contender? This just proves how weak the NL is.

As long as they're better every other team in the NL, they'll get to the WS. The fact that the NL is weaker league just means that they won't win the damn thing.

palehozenychicty
06-15-2006, 01:47 PM
I don't think the Mets are that good. Pedro and Glavine are undeniably future HOFers and not pitching bad at all this year, but Steve Trachsel and El Duque are their #3 and #4? And that's supposed to be a World Series contender? This just proves how weak the NL is.

I feel the same, that their lineup and competent pitching will take them to the series, but they would fall to a team like us that has five quality starters and a potentially strong bullpen. The NL Least is just a bad division as well, with the Braves and Phils underachieving deeply. All I know is that it would make the Cubs and Yanks fans cry if this WS happened, ha ha ha!:whiner:

Lip Man 1
06-15-2006, 05:22 PM
Let's worry about oh...

winning the division....
or clinching the wild card...
then getting through the A.L. playoffs...

Before we start talking about World Series opponents, O.K.?

:rolleyes:

Lip

cbotnyse
06-15-2006, 05:37 PM
Let's worry about oh...

winning the division....
or clinching the wild card...
then getting through the A.L. playoffs...

Before we start talking about World Series opponents, O.K.?

:rolleyes:

Lip
The question is more towards if the Mets are for real. This is the talking baseball forum right? thanks for your great insight and thoughtful contribution to this thread. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

FedEx227
06-15-2006, 05:55 PM
Two Words: National League

SouthSide_HitMen
06-15-2006, 08:28 PM
The question is more towards if the Mets are for real. This is the talking baseball forum right? thanks for your great insight and thoughtful contribution to this thread. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Being a lifelong Mets fan (well since the mid 1970s - they are my second favorite team) I can tell with with a healthy bit of skepticism (which the Mets are responsible for after all the false starts / hype / disappointments, etc.) the Mets will win the NL East dethroning Atlanta for the first full season since before the strike (1990 to be exact).

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/ATL/1990.shtml

I don't know what they will do in the playoffs but only the Cardinals look as good (and that is if they stay / regain their health). Their core (Reyes, Beltran, Delgado & Wright) are one of the best in baseball and Floyd has bounced back somewhat from a horrid start.

I expect Pedro, Glavine & Bannister to regress a bit in the second half whereas Trachsel should improve a bit. I'd move Heilman to the rotation but unfortunately I'm not Willie Randolph. Their bullpen is like the 2005 White Sox bullpen sans Takatsu.

They can beat anyone in the NL Playoffs or lose to anyone - I wouldn't be shocked. Whoever wins the NL will be lucky to take 1 or 2 games in the World Series. I don't expect the NL to win a World Series until the next decade.

chisoxmike
06-15-2006, 11:29 PM
The question is more towards if the Mets are for real. This is the talking baseball forum right? thanks for your great insight and thoughtful contribution to this thread. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

But people are taking this thread as a point to match up the Mets and Sox when the Mets are the first place team and we are not.

Jjav829
06-16-2006, 10:46 AM
If they can get one more starter, they are definitely a legitimate championship contender. As it is, they are probably good enough to get to the World Series. I'm just not sure that they can ride Pedro and Glavine like the D'backs did with Schilling and RJ a few years ago. The Mets are about as good as it gets offensively for a NL team. They would actually match up well against an AL team in the World Series because they have some good bats on their bench that could be used in the DH role.

Their 7-8-9 combination is the best in baseball IMO. Heilman, Sanchez and Wagner are just filthy. But I still come back to their rotation. I just can't see El Duque holding up for the entire season. Soler has been good, but what happens to him the second time around? He doesn't have the stuff of Contreras, so it's possible teams start catching up to him as he gets around the league. Maybe Pelfrey joins the rotation later in the year and can give them a boost, but I don't think a rookie can fill that 3rd starter role. You know who would look good in their rotation right now? Scott Kazmir. They'd be the favorites to win the World Series with Kazmir. Nice going, Jim Duquette.

Beautox
06-16-2006, 10:55 AM
At least they can't balme Steve Phillips for that one :tongue:

SouthSide_HitMen
06-16-2006, 11:56 AM
If they can get one more starter, they are definitely a legitimate championship contender. As it is, they are probably good enough to get to the World Series. I'm just not sure that they can ride Pedro and Glavine like the D'backs did with Schilling and RJ a few years ago. The Mets are about as good as it gets offensively for a NL team. They would actually match up well against an AL team in the World Series because they have some good bats on their bench that could be used in the DH role.

Their 7-8-9 combination is the best in baseball IMO. Heilman, Sanchez and Wagner are just filthy. But I still come back to their rotation. I just can't see El Duque holding up for the entire season. Soler has been good, but what happens to him the second time around? He doesn't have the stuff of Contreras, so it's possible teams start catching up to him as he gets around the league. Maybe Pelfrey joins the rotation later in the year and can give them a boost, but I don't think a rookie can fill that 3rd starter role. You know who would look good in their rotation right now? Scott Kazmir. They'd be the favorites to win the World Series with Kazmir. Nice going, Jim Duquette.

****ing Duquette. :angry:

There is a cheap alternative who I think will give them league average innings aided by ****ty National League offense as well as the friendly pitching confines of Shea (and RFK and Dolphins Stadium and Atlanta). I don't think this move would cost them much (about the same as the El Duque move which I agree is a stop gap short term measure until he breaks down - I'd like to see him saved with periodic spot starts / bullpen work until the playoffs).

Jun. 15The Angels are leaning towards sending Jeff Weaver (P) LAA (http://www.rototimes.com/index.php?sport=bsball&type=profile&name=3364) to the bullpen when Bartolo Colon comes off the DL to allow Jered Weaver to remain the rotation, according to the LA Times. Jeff Weaver sports a 6.15 ERA on the year, although he holds a 3.72 ERA over his last three starts. The Angels have notified teams that he is available, offering to pay a chunk of what's left on his $8.325-million contract, but they have found little interest.

buehrle4cy05
06-16-2006, 10:57 PM
Jun. 15The Angels are leaning towards sending Jeff Weaver (P) LAA (http://www.rototimes.com/index.php?sport=bsball&type=profile&name=3364) to the bullpen when Bartolo Colon comes off the DL to allow Jered Weaver to remain the rotation, according to the LA Times. Jeff Weaver sports a 6.15 ERA on the year, although he holds a 3.72 ERA over his last three starts. The Angels have notified teams that he is available, offering to pay a chunk of what's left on his $8.325-million contract, but they have found little interest.

Anybody else find it ironic that Jeff Weaver might be traded so his little brother can pitch in the rotation?