They were over .500 when K-Rod was traded… after the bad start, the Mets were playing good ball at the time…Reyes and Beltran and Murph were playing great…We were expecting Wright,Ike and Santana to come back and give them a boost.

But at the same time, who knew that the Braves would tank like that?

Sadly, things went bad after the trades, the Pen fell apart, Santana and Ike never came back, Wright wasn’t that good and Reyes, Murphy, Izzy and Neise lost time to injuries.

So while I think they could have “contended” if they “went for it”…even if things worked out…they still would have fallen short, or at best, lost in the 1st round of the playoffs.

I guess the questions would be, would attendance be better if the Mets were “contending”? and how would the fan base feel on about the team (and Alderson) if they played well in the 2nd half?

Phillies (man I am not sure on this one anymore, their age, declining offense and tougher league may limit those 95+ win seasons. Question is how long is Howard out and how effective when he returns?)
Giants, I just don’t think the West will be as strong. I don’t see Arizona being back to the same level and I think the Giants with a more healthy offense will turn the division quickly.
Reds, will it work this year? They were the sexy pick last year and bottomed up. I think adding the spots they have will be huge and will take the central.
I would go with the Cards next just because I expect the rest of the Central to be putrid.
Then I think you can honestly lump the Marlins, Braves, and Nationals in the same. I agree with Alex’s point on will there be any carry over from the collapse for the Braves? However, are the Marlins or Nats ready to win yet either?
I would let the Dbacks fall to here. Again with them playing in the West they may get more wins but that will depend on the Rockies who I expect to rebound as well as the Dodgers.

So not looking at the problems of the other teams I would go
Phillies, Giants, Reds, Cards, Braves, Marlins, Nats, Dbacks, Rockies, Dodgers, Mets, Pirates, Cubs, Padres, Astros.

My thinking is that contending is being within five games of a playoff spot between the ASB and the trade dead line. Basically because that’s the time you know what teams are legitimate and are looking to improve by adding pieces vs let’s say, trading your best hitter and your closer.

So Alderson made the decision last year that they weren’t going to contend and decided that saving money was the smart decision. If he didn’t trade away Beltran and KRod and seeing how the Braves tanked at the end, the Mets might of had a chance to contend…of course, they could of still fallen short and they’d be stuck with KRod’s contract and not have gotten anything for Beltran. In the poker game of baseball, Sandy folded and walked away. I’m sure we could have a bitter and name calling argument over if this was the correct move.

So to answer the question of 2012, I think there is a chance to “contend” but a lot of things have to fall into place and they need a lot of bounce backs and luck, but it could happen. Unfortunately, seeing how difficult the start of the season is, the Mets could be in a BIG hole in July. But having a difficult start usually means your 2nd half is easier…it is, so if the Mets could be around 500% by mid season, they could have a strong 2nd half push. The real problem is, the Mets are a mediocre team in a very strong division, so their playing tough teams all season long and comparable teams in the weaker divisions will have the advantage.

The reason I ranked Miami 3rd is probably different than why others have, but I agree 100% that when you have a lot of new faces, success is no guarantee. I personally think Stanton/LoMo are going to have big years.

I’d bet a lot of $ on Reyes going on the DL which will be an interesting test for Ozzie, does he move Hanley to SS for that time or stick to his guns?

Josh Johnson is a huge, huge factor here. When healthy, I’d put him in a matchup against any NL starter including Halladay (not saying he’d win every time but I’d feel just fine)

If you actually look around the NL, they are a VERY young league. So on paper, Miami’s roster looks better than most in the NL but intangibles will come into play

On paper they look greatly improved, however, how well the new players interact with each other and play as a cohesive unit is something we don’t know yet. Who knows how Ramirez’s disruptive attitude will play out with these other new highly paid free agents. Will he create friction with Jose moving him away from the shortstop position? How many games could he cost the fish with his lax play?

Pittsburgh and Chicago still in the rebuilding stage? Is that a hint of things to come for us over the next few years?

One point that has been overlooked — how can the Mets have a good year with the Wilpons bound to hold another fire sale again this July? Whatever positive Terry and his crew accomplish the first half of the season, expect them to again be undermined under the guise of obtaining good young prospects for rebuilding.

That’s what I meant about a hint of things to come referring to Pittsburgh and Chicago.

I would probably rank the NL like this: Phillies, Cardinals, Marlins, Diamondbacks, Giants, Nationals, Reds, Braves, Brewers, Mets, Dodgers, Rockies, Cubs, Pirates, Padres, Astros