With Nelson Figueroa’s shutout over Houston on Sunday, the Mets sealed the lid on yet another decade without a Championship. These last 10 years were filled with extreme highs and bottomless lows. But overall, how will the first decade of the 21st century be remembered? In my opinion, this was the worst decade in our history.
Each 10 year period conjures up certain memories and images. The Mets of the 60s’ are black and white snapshots. We think of Casey Stengel, Marvelous Marv and being laughable, but lovable losers. But the decade ended with the highest of highs. The Mets compiled a pitiful .382 winning percentage but one World Championship.
The Mets of the 70s? Pitching and defense. Seaver, Koosman and Matlack. Even though the last few years was a dark period in our history, we compiled a .473 winning percentage. We won 1 NL pennant and from 70-76, we were at least always in a pennant race.
The 80s started on a low. But there was new ownership and promise of a brighter future. Although it took until the middle years for us to become competitive, the Mets of the 80’s will be remembered for Doc and Darryl, Keith and Gary. And of course, Mookie and Buckner. We captured 1 Championship and 1 NLE crown and compiled a record of 816-749 for a .521 winning percentage. Statistically and historically, it was the best of times.
How are the 1990’s remembered? Probably what came to be known as ‘the worst team(s) money could buy.’ Big names and big contracts equated to big failures. Generation K never materialized. Isringhausen, Pulsipher and Wilson never did turn into the reincarnation of Seaver, Kooz and Matlack. But by the end of the decade, there was hope and promise. Every year from 95 to 99, our win total increased and culminated in capturing the NL wildcard before losing to Atlanta in a heartbreaking 6 game series. The decade ended for the Mets with a walk-off walk. We finished the 1990’s with a .494 winning percentage.
That brings us into the 21st century. Bobby Valentine led the Mets to their first NL pennant in almost 15 years and NY had our 1st Subway Series in over 4 decades. However, within 18 months of winning the pennant we found ourselves rebuilding. The 5 game Series against the Yankees quickly became a distant memory. But once again, by the middle years, we had promise and hope. ‘The Future is Now’ we were told. The Mets seemed destined to not only be competitive but many felt that a dynasty was beginning. The torch of New York Baseball was being passed to Queens. Youngsters Wright and Reyes were to be the foundation our empire was built upon. Add to the mix the likes of Pedro Martinez, Carlos Beltran, Carlos Delgado and Billy Wagner and surely a new day was dawning. But as we look back now, 2006 was not the start of something great. It was the end.
So why do things look so bleak? Why does the future not look promising? On paper, the period 2000-2009 looks good. It was only the 2nd decade in our history that we finished above .500 (815-803) and we did appear in the post-season twice, also matching the 80’s. But I cant help wonder how it will look in the history books. I feel that these last 10 years will be remembered for ‘Lost Opportunity.’ Clubs that never developed, that never lived up to their potential and sadly, two historic chokes.
Never has a decade ended with so much pessimism, bitterness and uncertainty. The Mets spent the 60’s as a joke, but the decade ended with a miracle and a clear indication that brighter days are coming. The 70’s ended with the Mets losing 99 games but rumors of new ownership that promised to rebuild a decimated farm system and make much needed changes to Shea gave us hope. By the time the 80’s ended, heroes from 86, such as Keith and Gary and Mookie were gone. But still, the future looked bright. Doc and Darryl were still young. Gregg Jefferies showed unlimited promise and our pitching staff was lead by Doc, along with Frank Viola and a young stud pitcher named David Cone. Although none of this mattered, we at least entered the 1990’s feeling optimistic. When the 90’s ended, we once again had hope. We captured the NL wildcard and returned to the post-season for the 1st time in over a decade.
But as this decade ends, I see no hope. In all fairness, we got hit with injuries of almost biblical proportions. Mets players spent 1480 days on the DL this season. Our 95 HR’s was the worst in the majors. But still the facts remain. Our 70 wins is the 2nd lowest of the decade and the 4th lowest win total in the last quarter century.
I’ve tried to remain optimistic and look for bright spots. I’ve tried to view the glass as being half full. Never has a decade ended with so many question marks. The health of Jose Reyes is a big concern. David Wright’s power has dropped substantially and he has appeared confused at the plate since his concussion. Our manager, our GM, our owner and even our new stadium are not popular with fans. Once again our farm system has been decimated and once again in our wake we have left a trail of big contracts that failed to produce. It’s a sad day when the only thing we fans talk positively about anymore is our broadcast team and the food at Citi Field.
Our drop off from 89 wins last season to 70 is the 2nd biggest in our history, behind only 1976 to 1977, the year we traded Tom Seaver. Hopefully, the results wont be the same. I hope we are not about to embark on another tailspin into the abyss and a prolonged period of last place finishes and long summers.
*Mets Merized Online Needs Your Help*
Sorry .. don’t know where (or if) you were in the 70s, but I think you’re applying very different standards to these decades. Maybe I was more optimistic in ‘79 because I was 9, but the team and organization were both much, much worse than they are today, and things wouldn’t even start to turn around till 83. To this day my father keeps reminding me of when the Mets sat Lee Mazzilli on the last day of the season to protect his .250 average. The 90s may hurt more because of what should have been. But the worst thing I’ve been saying of 2009 is that it reminds me of the late 70s. The 62 Mets are the gold standard for cute ineptitude. The late 70s remain the gold standard for pathetic unwatchableness, not really approached again until this year.
Yes, Gil–I was there in the 70’s and remember it all too well. I remember how they didnt even open the top level at Shea cause of low attendance and how the ushers seemingly outnumbered the fans. I believe it was 79 when Torre sat Mazzilli the final day of the year.
I also remember Mets management moving Mazzilli to 1b. Why? So they could sell more tickets by having the female fans see him better then in Center Field.
But from 77-83, NOTHING was expected from the Mets–and that’s exactly what was delivered: Nothing. This decade was filled with promise and hope, unlike the 70s. I just feel that never before have the expectations been so high on Opening Day and the end results been so disappointing 162 games later.
During the 70’s, as a whole, we finished over 500 6 times. (same as this decade) but this decade the expectations were much higher then they were back then. Back then, I think, we did MORE with LESS, as opposed to now where we have MORE and have done very little.
Well, we agree on almost everything … except that I’m happier with the disappointments of this decade than with the hopelessness of 77-82. And I guess I’m more optimistic than others about the Mets’ next few years. I think they’ll be brighter than fans are expecting.
I believe this is the worst decade because the Mets spent more money than any other team in the NL and expectations were high. In the 70’s we got very lucky in 1973, but lets not forget we were all the way at the bottom in payroll that decade. Nobody ever mistook any of the seventies teams as a playoff contender except maybe in 1970 after the Miracle Mets. In the 2000’s every year was going to be “the team, the time” with the feeling that “our season has come.” The trials and tribulations of the 2000’s pale in comparison to the 70’s and maybe even the 90’s as well.
and to this very day people still don’t get it………MONEY does not buy championships……….
Right on Kay and Devin. Money is a poor substitute for heart and grit. Those seventies teams were a joy to watch and they had plenty of fight in them. Even those bad eighties years were fun to watch. They played their hearts out despite being overmatched.
Your memory is a little different then mine. The early 70’s were good, but even in 73 the first 3/4 of the season was awful until “Ya Gotta Believe” was born. Then from 75 on – I don’t remember too much heart at all. I saw more moments of heart this year (moments – lets be clear I’m not saying throughout the whole year).
We must face it, that the injuries killed the team this year both physically and eventually mentally. We can talk blue in the face about Omar and how “bad” he is, but no GM in any sports arena would have overcame all that.
Hmm, It means nothing a year or decade who cares, because “wait till next year” like a Brooklyn fan would say is all that matters.
And by the way the pitching in Sept. was pretty good, to bad the hitters could not do it when they had men in scoring position.
And can any one out there say that the 4 starters Redding, Fig, Misch, Maine should not be coming to ST next year?
They all did very good jobs in Sept.
[...] to Mets Merized Online, this was the Worst Decade in Mets [...]
I think “disapointing” is far more fair than “worst”. Obviously the 60’s despite 1969 had to be the “worst” since they only landed over .500 once (1969)..the problem with the 70’s and the 90’s is there WERE expectations that they would build upon the success of the latter part of the previous decade. 1969, 1986 appear to be mostly oddities, despite playoffs in both cases a few years later. To me, the 90’s were by far “worse” as the 1986 team never became the dynasty it was supposed to be. And then you had the ventures into big name free agency that didnt pan out, and homegrown (albeit flawed) talent like Gooden and Strawberry walking. The first real taste of success the Mets had in the 90’s was May 22nd 1998 when the Piazza trade occured. And the reality is, if the Marlins don’t dismantle their 1997 Championship team in a truly “bad for baseball” kinda way, there is no way we compete in 99 or 00. (We don’t get Leiter or Cook, and Sheffield,Johnson and Bonilla wouldnt be traded for Piazza and Zeile…..with Mike obviously spun off to the Mets….who knows where those two wind up as a result).
Yes, the 00’s had a lot of promise…starting off in 2000 with a World Series run, with arguably a weaker team than the team that had not made it the year before. To a decade where they were certainly more competitive for more years than in any other decade (6 years over .500 in the 70’s means nothing to me, since 4 of those years were 3 games or less over .500 and all at the beginning of the decade (except for the fluky 1976). Lets look at the Mets W/L by decade…
60s:494-799
70’s:763-850
80s:816-743
90s:761-786
00s:815-804
Only 2 decades over .500 and coincidentally the only 2 decades with multiple playoff appearances. OK, probably not coincidence. But this should be at least the basis for proof that the 00’s were NOT the worst decade. Heck they had one less win than the 80’s Mets. Most disapointing? Perhaps. Most frustrating? very possibly. But worst overall? No. i cant say i think so. Either way though, glad it’s over….let’s all move on
Also to be kind of on the anal side, decades technically don’t start till the year after the – so 62-70, 71-80, 81-90, 91-00, 01-10. So we have another year for a full analysis of the decade.
You could actually do it either way. For example if your were to look up lists of the top eighties albums, it wouldn’t include anything from 1990. MTV and VH1 do those retrospectives all the time. Also there is a baseball trivia question about who is the only player that played in four different decades. The answer is Bill Buckner 1969-1990.
You’re right. The last day of the current decade ends Dec 31, 2010. (I thought Ted WIlliams played from 1939-1960).
Actually, there’s a whole slew of players who played in 4 decades. Full list here http://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Four-Decade_Players including Rickey Henderson, Jesse Orosco, Tim McCarver, Carlton Fisk, and Nolan Ryan. There are even 2 guys that played in 5 decades.
I was only 5 years old when the Mets won the 86 World Series, so it all kind of sucks to me