With Twitter, Facebook and blogs – both mainstream and otherwise – available throughout the 24/7/365 news cycle, it’s impossible to not transfer that meme to those that cover and watch sports.  On Saturday, Jordany Valdespin took one to the forearm a day after he embarrassingly celebrated a home run during a Pirates blowout win.  What resulted was talk about the validity of Pittsburgh’s Bryan Morris‘ actions, and how the Valdespin’s teammates reacted. Instead of continuing this news “filler,” let me set everyone straight as to what the deal is with Valdespin.

First, Jordany Valdespin is nothing more than a backup player. He isn’t the future, nor is he a clone of Jose Reyes, the answer in the outfield or infield, or some sort of energizer for a slumping offense. He possesses poor plate discipline and is an average defender, at best, at any position. His career MILB on-base percentage was .330. In the big leagues he’s shown even less of a penchant to get on-base with his .287 clip. Even worse, he doesn’t come across as a hard worker or someone that possesses a big league baseball IQ. There is nothing with Valdespin’s process that screams big league starter, much less star. I have my doubts he will stick around since he seems unable to endear himself to any clubhouse throughout his career.

This is not about race. The players dislike Valdespin because of who he is. Think it’s just his current teammates? After a game-winning grand-slam against the Dodgers, former B-Mets reliever Erik Turgeon took to Twitter and shared these nuggets:

“Valdespin with a walk off home run. If you need me I will be in the bathroom throwing up! I have Zero respect for that piece of s***”

“If your shocked that, then you don’t kno bout all that! Happy for the mets wish someone deserving got the hit like Lagares!”

“Tough for me to get Valdespin out when I’m on the same team as him don’t ya think?”

“Evidence ask your favorite guy in the organization who there least favorite guy is”

Who cares what a retired minor league reliever says, right? What about his current teammates, none who seemed upset or enraged that he was plunked on Saturday. There was furor about how John Buck conducted the pie celebration after that very same grand slam. When I asked Buck about it last week his response with a coy smile was telling: “A big walk-off home run deserves a big pie to the face.”

Read from that what you will, but contrite, at least in my opinion, is not the word to use when describing Buck’s comments. Remember, this is the same guy that was suspended in the minors for an undisclosed incident (some speculation is that it was for a Ruben Rivera-type action, read into that what you will), and again this past offseason during winter ball. There is too much smoke around Valdespin’s fire.

On a good team Valdespin provides speed and power off the bench. Those are characteristics that do make him valuable. His clownish behavior is probably overshadowing that right now, making the story more about him than the team. This will be tolerated when someone like R.A. Dickey is winning Cy Young Awards, but rarely so with a borderline big league player. Valdespin embarrassed the Mets this weekend. Take those blue and orange sunglasses off and see what the opponents do to another bad team celebrating a meaningless home run. It reminds me of how the Nationals used to be when they had Anderson Hernandez, Lastings Milledge and Elijah Dukes: Bad attitude, clownish behavior and, worst of all, a lot of losses.

The shame of it all is Valdespin does have some raw talent. If he took the time to learn from those around him, and put the effort into improving, perhaps there would be hope for better days ahead. Right now, you can’t even get him to take extra batting practice. He consistently never shows up to such events, which is almost sacrilegious on a team that is hitting so poorly; even more damning for a wet behind the ears rookie.

If I were the Mets I would move on from Valdespin ASAP. You probably don’t want to release him as he is too good to be put on the waiver wire. Perhaps there is a minor deal that Alderson can spring for an outfielder. Not a starter or star, but someone that is a bench player, but is a starter on this team due to circumstances. Maybe another team looks at Valdespin’s talent and thinks they can “steal” a future contributor. You never know what you can get if you ask.

Sandy Alderson needs to set the tone and show the club that professionalism and behavior matters to this organization. Ridding the clubhouse of Valdespin won’t turnaround this lost season, but it will be addition by subtraction. You are not losing anything on the field as those late-game home runs are bound to run dry as he makes his way around the league.

I am sure this opinion will stir up debate, however I doubt it’s worth the time.

Those that contribute the least spray the most champagne; they also take up the most space when it comes to the news.

Matt Harvey has been compared to some of the biggest names of the game both past and present. Whether it’s because of his lethal arsenal, his no-nonsense demeanor on the mound, or just his determination to keep getting better. In 14 starts he is breaking down long-standing records with such ease.

While expectations and pressure like that would crush most young players, Matt Harvey thrives on it. I was especially taken by his reaction on Friday night when fans at Citi Field roared with the chants of “Har-Vey’s Better! Har-Vey’s Better” with every pitch Stephen Strasburg threw.

It was amazing to watch both pitcher’s reactions as the SNY camera crew went to a split screen. There was Harvey sitting on the bench – looking all business and wiping his face with a towel. He was immune to what was happening on the field and didn’t allow himself to be captured by the moment. On the mound however, you could tell Strasburg was being rattled.

Pressure and expectations is a crazy thing. For many players it’s their death knell, but not for Harvey. This kid has ice running through his veins.

There’s more to Harvey than meets the eye and it may take years until we figure out what makes him tick. Baseball has always been a game of comparisons, but most often the comparisons are unfounded and the expectations are never met. So far, it looks like Harvey will be the exception to that rule. Gregg Jefferies never did become the next Ty Cobb, and the teenage hitting machine Fernando Martinez never did become the next Roberto Clemente.

“A lot of guys can throw 98,’’ manager Terry Collins said. “I like his competitive make-up. … Fear of failure is not in Matt Harvey’s make-up.’’

You know what else stood out from Friday night? Harvey’s comments after the game.

“I’ve got a long way to go,’’ Harvey said. “I appreciate the fans and the support and all that. But we’re here to win. We’re the New York Mets. It’s not just one guy out there. Every time I take the ball I’m trying to win for the team.”

Spoken like a true leader…

And for those of you who keep saying you want to see how Harvey would react in a tough situation, how does the the bases loaded with nobody out against the team who won more games than any other team last season sound? Is that challenging enough for you?

Harvey worked out of the jam with ease. “That’s a tough lineup, he said. “At any point it felt like it could unravel and things could have gone the other way.’’

However it didn’t unravel. Harvey bore down like a warrior and slammed the door on their offense. ”That’s the mark of an ace right there,’’ Collins said. “That’s why we can’t say enough things about him. Games like this can lead to a great season.”

Can you believe that there are still some Mets fan who haven’t bought into Harvey yet? It’s true. I’ve seen the doubts and speculation right here on our comment threads. They remain cautiously optimistic waiting for the bubble to burst. It’s hard to believe that 14 starts or basically a half season, and non-believers still abound.

I’m seeing some of the best raves and optimism about Harvey from non-Mets and rival fans. One Yankee fan told Me, “I can’t believe you got, Harvey. You’re so freaking lucky.”

David Price and Curt Schilling are also on the Matt Harvey bandwagon. So are Michael Kay and Mike Francesa. So are Bryce Harper and Ryan Zimmerman. So are R.A. Dickey, Jon Lester and Justin Verlander.

So am I and most of MMO. I actually have been since day one.

I’ve seen a meteoric rise like one this twice before as Met fan. The first time was with with “The Franchise” Tom Seaver, and then two decades later I saw it again with “Doctor K’ Dwight Gooden. I became emotionally invested from day with those two Mets icons too, just like I am now with Harvey. As a Met fan, I always did take “Ya Gotta Believe” very seriously. Times have changed, but I’m still old-fashioned that way.

1. You went to the right movie, but for the wrong reason
2. You missed a great movie … and that’s a shame

Maybe, both.

Coincidentally, sports media reporter Ed Sherman fell victim to both of those circumstances. In a column for the National Sports Journalism Center at Indiana University Sherman seemed disappointed by the fact that 42  “… hardly captures the totality of (Wendell) Smith’s role in integrating baseball and his overall impact on the life of the baseball legend.”

A quick refresher for younger generations who might be asking the question: Who is Wendell Smith? He was an African-American sportswriter who recommended Robinson to Branch Rickey. Smith was also a victim of discrimination like many working black men and women of the generation. He wasn’t allowed in the press box at Forbes Field and wasn’t welcomed in the all-white Baseball Writers Association of America but, like Robinson, he broke the color barrier in sports journalism, becoming the first African-American member of the BBWAA in 1948.

There is no question, Wendell Smith is a part of sports journalism history. Civil Rights history. Black history. Baseball history. Yes, Smith played a central role in creating an opportunity for Robinson, but this 128-minute movie is not about Wendell Smith or Branch Rickey or Rachel Robinson, it’s about Jackie Robinson. Sure, each of these people helped shape Robinson’s life but the story, the movie, is about Robinson. The tag line to the movie should give it away: The True Story of an American Legend.

Meanwhile, Eric Deggans, TV and Media Critic for the Tampa Bay Times, contributor to the National Sports Journalism Center at Indiana University and Sherman’s colleague, selfishly failed to understand 42. He confessed,  “… the journalist in me also wished we could have seen a bit more of the media story; namely, how Rickey and Smith managed the media to make Robinson’s quest look noble as possible to uneasy white baseball fans … it’s a bit of pipe dream to wonder what might have happened if Smith got more screen time — even if the intimate story of a quick-tempered Robinson and the activist sportswriter who helped sell him to the world might have been the different take critics were looking for.”

For the longest time there was a sense of frustration because no one could sell Jackie Robinson’s story idea to Hollywood. Not Spike Lee. Not Robert Redford. Then, finally, director Brian Helgeland comes along and gets it done. And what happens? Critics want equal screen (and story) time for Wendell Smith. If you plan on forking out your $10 for a ticket to see 42 this weekend please, remember, this is a movie about 42 — Jackie Robinson.

Mr. Sherman, Mr. Deggans, with all due respect, you missed a great movie.

Updated on 4/18 by Joe D.

And right on cue, in his column for the New York Post, Joel Sherman says that injuries to D’Arnaud’s back, knee and now foot could suggest that he is “injury-prone.”

Let us also remember the ticking clock does not stop. D’Arnaud is no baby,” Sherman writes. “He is 24 — six months older than Jason Heyward. The Mets’ best-laid plans had D’Arnaud and Zack Wheeler breaking in this year and being part of a serial contending cornerstone for next season.

The thing of it is that the knee and now this foot injury were both freakish in nature and just something that all catchers are subject to.

How many times a week do we see a collision at the plate or a foul ball off the bat hitting the catcher? This is what happened both times with D’Arnaud and it could have been any other catcher as well, just fill in the blank.

Original Post by Joe D. on 4/17

Sandy Alderson just announced that Travis d’Arnaud has a non-displaced fracture in the first metatarsal in his left foot.

Alderson said d’Arnaud is in a walking boot and will fly to New York to visit team doctors at the Hospital for Special Surgery for further evaluation and to evaluate the severity of the injury. Currently, there is no timetable for his return.

As we first reported late last night, Sacramento’s Tyler Ladendorf was at the plate as 51s pitcher Adam Kolarek broke off a 1-2 curveball that Ladendorf fouled off d’Arnaud’s foot. After being attended to by the club’s athletic trainer, Joe Golia, d’Arnaud stayed in the game.

However, manager Wally Backman opted to replace him a half inning later as Landon Powell pinch hit for d’Arnaud, striking out in the bottom of the sixth inning.

D’Arnaud was hitting .250 with five doubles, one home run and eight RBI in 36 at-bats this season.

I’m so depressed over this. We were actually planning to attend Zack Wheeler‘s next start this weekend and were hoping to secure some time with the top Mets prospect. This is so disappointing.

I know that by now the haters are coming out in full force and will look to throw Sandy Alderson under the bus.

I got two words for them…

One of the most exciting things I was looking forward to this season was the day we’d first get to see Travis d’Arnaud catch Matt Harvey and then eventually Zack Wheeler. It was going to be the highlight of my season. I remain optimistic however, and it still could happen.

I spoke to an injury expert who practices sports medicine and he told me these types of injuries can take as little as four weeks and as long as eight weeks to heal properly. But he then added that because Travis is a catcher it would probably be closer to eight weeks as the Mets will make sure his foot is sturdy and strong enough to support his weight when he crouches behind the plate. It sounded like he knew what he was talking about.

We at MMO all hope for a speedy recovery and wish Travis d’Arnaud the best. He’s a great talent and still has a great future ahead of him.

Photo Credit: New York Times Archives

SCHADENFREUDE (shahd-n-froi-duh) def. Satisfaction or pleasure felt at another’s misfortune. From German SCHADEN “damage” and FREUDE “joy”

There is a type of this psychological phenomenon specific to fans of the New York Metropolitan baseball club that many of us are familiar with and that the more forthcoming (and possibly emotionally healthy) of us will admit to: MET FAN SCHADENFREUDE – that particular type of delight that comes from that special combination of a Mets’ victory coinciding with a Yankees’ loss.

I think of Bob Murphy and his “Happy Recap” and Howie Rose’s “Put it in the books!” and I think: classy, classic, celebratory words.

I hear John Sterling’s “The Yankees win! The-e-e-uh Yankees w-i-i-i-i-n!” and I think: elementary school playground taunt.

Is it me? Do I fall into that particular category of Mets fan that, as I have heard it put, counts it a “good day” if the Mets win and a “great day” if the Mets win AND the Yankees lose? Can I not have the good grace and gentility to wish bon chance to our beloved team’s crosstown rivals? Have I not evolved spiritually to the point where I can easily separate the fortunes or misfortunes of my favorite team from whatever fate befalls the crew from the Bronx? Perhaps not.

As devotees of the Orange and Blue, we have had to deal with the almost perpetual in-your-face superiority of the Pinstriped Pounders who occupy a space across the river from Queens and in the consciousness of the typical Gothamite baseball fan. And it’s not just us. The musical “Damn Yankees” was written from the perspective of a Washington Senators fan, yet another demographic that had to deal with the maddening, seemingly perennial success of the Bronx Bunch.

Are we jealous? Of course! But there is more to it than that. We don’t necessarily begrudge any fan his exultation when his team achieves the goal to which all teams aspire, but we look for a modicum of class to be inherent in the celebratory process. Is it not enough to claim the crown of “champion” without having to rub it in to those of us whose appointed avatars of athletic greatness fell short? Can we not be left to lick the wounds of our disappointment with some dignity? WILL YOU STOP WAVING THOSE DAMN PENNANTS AND JETER JERSEYS IN OUR FACES?!

As I write this, the Yankees are coming off series losses to the Red Sox and Detroit Tigers to open the season. The Tigers are now as the Yankees were then. They have a lineup replete with big time smashers that lead even casual observers to think that it is only a matter of time, in any given game, before they have had their way with whatever pitcher is charged with the daunting task of retiring them. And the Tigers did not merely defeat the Yanks those games, they seemed to be toying with them, letting them get a bit close, and then pulling farther ahead in a way that looked almost effortless.

If those were games involving the Mets, I’d be cringing and hoping for either a miracle or at least a mercifully quick resolution. But because the Yankees were the opponent, I watched with smug satisfaction as the primary object of my baseball envy got swatted about like badminton birdie. Would I care even half as much if it were the Angels or White Sox who were the recipients of this type of man-handling? Doubtful.

There is another type of Mets and Yankees fan I’ve heard of, though I am not entirely sure that they are not merely the stuff of legend: the so-called “New York baseball fan” who roots for both franchises, if not equally, then at least in part. Personally, I find this difficult to believe, because if one were at heart a Yankee fan, the flaunting of the tradition, the many, many championships, and the constant use of the word “dynasty” to describe the various historical eras of success would leave no room and no need for an “auxiliary” object of adoration. If one were a Mets fan at heart, it would be inconceivable to willingly allow them to share the spotlight with a team that appears to hog it way too much anyway.

If this season develops the way it appears to be headed, and the Yankees are pushed to the back of the line for post-season glory, I will make my best effort not to engage in unsportsmanlike schadenfreude at their fate. After all, I have nothing against the players or the organization, per se, and have genuine admiration for members of their current roster (e.g. Mariano, Jeter) for their grace and excellence. But as a Mets fan, I know too well the feeling of having to settle for whatever small satisfaction could be gleaned statistically or otherwise from yet another season out of the spotlight. Frankly, I’m tired of doing so and would just as soon not have to share whatever genuine glory may lay down the road. If this means that I need to evolve more as a person and a sports fan, so be it. I’m still doing it wearing a Mets hat.

As we try and get our minds back to the normal activities, it is hard to not think about these tragedies and how so many people are affected.  You kind of feel selfish to think that you are one of the lucky ones that are not affected by this event.  But being a father of two young boys ages 7 and 3, it tears my heart apart to know that not only were there adults injured and maimed, but a young innocent boy was killed and other children fighting for their lives.

The news stations will inundate us with different views and images of the tragedies and eventually you just need to look away and get away.  I thank God for sports in our country and around the world, because even in the face of such a tragedy, we have games that we can turn to that for a moment that will take us away from all the violent that is in our world.

After 9/11 happened,  I was living in New York and every single day all I watched was the news of how the planes hit the buildings and all the people that were loss and it became too much to bear.  Baseball was not playing for a few days and there wasn’t a way to relieve the pain and anger, but then the games began again and even though it didn’t feel right, it was needed.  And the Mets, after the tears and feeling helpless, went out and played a game to remember and it helped a bit with the healing.  Things didn’t go back to normal right away, but baseball helped me to forget for a moment what had happened to my city.

So even now when my mind is just racing with images of such a senseless act, I welcome the games, I need to feel hope again, and I know with baseball that for a couple of hours, I can get lost in the game and do not think about the horror.  But even though it is reality what has happened, you never forget, but for a few hours of a game, you will be able to deal with it a bit better.

The world awakens this morning seeking to right itself after a pair of explosions rocked Boston yesterday afternoon.  Lost are three souls, with no fewer than another one hundred and thirty-two injured.  Also lost in the day’s events, a nation’s sense of security when it comes to sporting events.

Long thought to be a potential target, major sporting events are often subjected to increased security measures.  To date, the United States had been successful (or lucky depending upon your point of view) to avoid such disasters, however April 15, 2013 will live on in infamy as the day the sports world was no longer immune to a direct attack.

The aftereffects of yesterday’s events remain to be seen, but as families, the city of Boston and the nation as a whole mourn this loss, its fair to assume that our shattered sense of security will send ripples through the sports world.  Decreased attendance can only be countered by increased protection in an effort to reassure fans that they’re safe.  At what point will your trip to the stadium resemble a tour through your local prison system?  At what point are fans treated like inmates? More importantly, at what point is such treatment necessary?

Long gone is the innocence of physically attending a game, ruined by the majority of fans who feel the price of admission grants them the freedom to drink like a fish and curse like a sailor without repercussion.  That arrogance, until yesterday thought by most to be the worst you could encounter during a trip to the ballpark, is now miniscule by comparison to the violence seen in the past twenty-four hours.  So what now?

Ultimately, too much energy is lost debating the successes and more frequently, the failures of our favorite sports franchises.  That faux pas takes place on a daily basis throughout social media and on sites just like this one.  I’m just as guilty as many of your reading this.  We’re debating a game..something that shouldn’t be life or death.  Its unfortunate that it takes such tragedy for things to fall in line once again, but it has become apparent that this is the world we live in now.  So remember, the next time your headed out to Citi Field, be cognizant of those around you, because not everyone is on the same team.

Follow me on Twitter at @RobPatterson83.

I’ve been reading many pieces in the national and local press suggesting that 2013 stands to be an especially fallow year for the New York baseball fan. The reasoning behind this assertion is based almost entirely on two assumptions:

1. The Mets will continue to tread the path of mediocrity with little or no hope of securing a post-season berth.

2. The Yankees, with their roster gutted of talent by injuries and free agent defections and having entered the new Hal Steinbrenner era of suddenly tightened purse strings, will likely join the Flushing crew in the steerage section of this year’s cruise to October.

As a lifelong Met fan, I have had to deal with the reality of a Yankee-centric world view for what seems like ages. Yes, the Bronx outfit has the history, the pageantry, and the 27 championships that every Yankee fan loves to flog us with, but is it right to assume that if one club faces the possibility of a down year and the other is engaged in a rebuild that the fan expectation should be the same for both? I think not.

A comparison of the two teams’ rosters and short-term outlook reveals a startlingly different dynamic at work. The Yanks, having sworn to hold the line at a payroll of $189 million and carrying the albatross of A-Rod’s contract for years to come, find themselves with an aging, patchwork roster and a farm system that lacks sufficient talent at the higher levels to compensate. To a degree, this is a natural outcome of having competed so well for long. Looking to seize the opportunity to “win now” during their impressive run, the Yanks quite understandably swapped many of their better prospects for the pieces that are now characterized as over-priced and under-productive.

The Mets by contrast look to me to be a team ascendant. Yes, my faith in the Alderson plan has been tested at times, and my frustration at having so many articles on my favorite team take the form of cautionary tales in the financial section rather than headlines on the back pages is still fresh in my mind. Still, I think that there is every reason to be optimistic about the present for this team, as the backbone of the rotation looks to be taking shape in the season just ahead. The relative youth at core of the lineup, soon to be bolstered by what portends to be one of the better catching corps in the game gives me hope. And not the kind of hope that springs from a hollow wish for a miracle, but rather the kind that recognizes a strategy that has worked both recently and in the past. Essentially, a strategy that reflects the belief  that “pitching wins pennants.”

Given the relatively low levels of the Mets’ current payroll, should we not expect that money will be spent to strengthen the roster if the need and opportunity arise? Yes, we’re all skeptical of the Wilpons’ declarations of solvency and of Sandy Alderson’s purported “choice” to hold back expenditures on previous occasions, but as the current edition of the team continues to take shape, I believe that even a Johan-less rotation that features Niese, Harvey and Wheeler by mid-season will be one to be reckoned with. Management knows that fans will come out for a team that wins often enough, even if they do not necessarily figure to land in the playoffs that year. A COMPETITIVE team is what we all yearn for, at base, because that is what gives us a reason to believe. I see this year’s team as rating the decision to pull the trigger on a few possible moves if circumstances dictate it.

So please, do not lump the Mets in with the Yankees oh mighty sports press. The Citi Field squad may not boast the apparent thunder of the Braves or Nats, nor the free-spending ways of the Dodger brass, but they elicit some positive adjectives that sound like they come from an ad for a local natural foods store: “home grown,” and “organic.” The old-fashioned approach of building a team from within and letting its farm system form a base for fan loyalty has worked before and worked in Queens (let us not forget the success of the Frank Cashen regime).  Those who say that one cannot use a patient approach in New York have often found themselves with no choice once other strategies have failed. I think that the Mets’ position at this point must look positively enviable from a Yankee’s perspective.

We want to welcome Gerry to the MMO staff and most of you may remember him from his MMO Fan Shots. We’re glad to add him to our team and you can look forward to some more great pieces from him in the future.

Hank Ratner, president and chief executive officer of The Madison Square Garden Company, today announced that distinguished sports executive, Dave Howard, has joined the company as president, MSG Sports, effective April 9. In this role, Mr. Howard will be responsible for running the business operations of the New York Knicks, New York Rangers, New York Liberty and Hartford Whale, as well as the management of the company’s Sports Properties unit.

“I am honored to be joining The Madison Square Garden Company, and particularly thrilled to have the privilege of leading MSG Sports,” said Mr. Howard.

“There are very few organizations anywhere with the strength of MSG’s sports brands, and I look forward to utilizing my experience to ensure we build on MSG’s position as one of the world’s leading sports organizations. I would also like to thank the Mets’ ownership and organization for what has been an amazing professional experience in Flushing.”

Mr. Howard joins MSG Sports following more than two decades at the New York Mets organization and Major League baseball. Most recently, he served as executive vice president of business operations for the Mets, where he had overseen all business departments, including ticket sales & services, corporate sales & partnerships, marketing &communications, broadcasting, media relations, venue services, ballpark operations, guest experience and security.

In addition, he was responsible for the team’s Florida training facility and the St. Lucie Mets and Brooklyn Cyclones minor league business operations. During his 20 years with the Mets organization, Mr. Howard held a number of significant roles, including as the team’s general counsel, corporate secretary, vice president, business affairs and senior vice president, business and legal affairs.

He played a key role in moving the Mets from Shea Stadium to Citi Field, where he was also instrumental in attracting other premiere events, including top concerts and college lacrosse, as well as the first-ever major soccer matches.

Wow, this is a huge loss for the executive branch of the New York Mets. We wish him the best on his new venture and thank him for his years of dedicated service.

The Dominican Republic remains undefeated after their 2-0 victory over Puerto Rico on Saturday.

As far back as I could remember, there was something my father always used to say to me whenever I became too obsessed with things whether it was spending too much money on baseball cards, eating too much on Thanksgiving, watching too much television, or just hanging out too much with my friends. “Everything in moderation,” he’d always say

I was reminded of that this evening in a very indirect way when I came across this tweet from ESPN’s Pedro Gomez and also the reply to it from Kevin Kernan of the NY Post – one of my current favorite sports writers.

Check it out…

My first reaction was one of curiosity, I wished Gomez was following me because I so desperately was seeking a follow-up tweet that never came. I wanted to direct message him to find out what compelled him to say that without drawing any additional attention to it because I knew I wanted to write about this.

Kevin’s response made me laugh because I’m a huge Twilight Zone fan, but the analogy seemed very fitting considering how many fans are still bewildered by OBP and OPS.

I took a quick look at the stats, and even with David Wright leading his team with a .438/.526/.750 slash line, Team USA posted a very weak .688 OPS overall. I couldn’t believe it was that bad.

In stark contrast, the Dominicans had an overwhelming .811 OPS as a team, with most of that coming from their sheer power numbers. And if you think that’s impressive, the Cubans had a .991 OPS to lead the entire tournament.

Captain America’s exploits aside, Team USA did do one thing very well offensively – they drew a lot of walks – 22 of them in just six contests. However they only managed one home run – you all remember the one, right?

In a similar six game span, the Dominicans blasted seven homers, but it was the Cubans that stunned them all with 11 home runs to lead the circuit.

Let me interject one thing here – small sample size. Nevertheless, it’s still very impressive.

Team USA had some great hitters, with many of them known for having great on-base percentages. But what they seemed to lack most were pure sluggers. They did have Ryan Braun and Giancarlo Stanton, but both came up short in the competition.

I think that one of the problems with metrics like OBP and even WAR, is that too many see them as the be-all, end-all, and clearly that’s not the case at all.

I was absolutely stunned during the Hall of Fame vote when Ken Davidoff used WAR to exclude Mike Piazza from his HOF Ballot and used OBP to include Kenny Lofton. Davidoff caught a lot of flack for it, deservedly so, and he later admitted that he erred and that it wouldn’t happen again in 2014. I believe him.

The real problem is this… How many more Ken Davidoffs are out there?

How many people in front office positions or in managerial/coaching jobs are as like-minded as Davidoff, and build their teams or write their lineup cards based on the same misguided methodology?

Am I saying that we should just disregard all this data, both new and old?

Of course not, let’s not go crazy here. Obviously OBP, OPS and WAR have all found their place in the national pastime and are quite useful in many different ways. There’s no question about that.

I guess what I’m saying here is what my dad always used to tell me… Everything in moderation.

On Sunday, Murray Chass published his thoughts on minorities in baseball with a splash of recent statistics, claiming the numbers would “disappoint, if not disgust” the late Jackie Robinson. The baseball columnist pointed out:

• Since the Philadelphia Phillies named Ruben Amaro Jr. general manager Nov. 3, 2008, teams have hired 14 general managers. All have been white.
• Of the last 23 managers hired, dating to May 2010, three have been minorities.
• Heading into the 2013 season, MLB has only one minority general manager (Amaro) and four minority managers.

The moment Chass starting thinking in these terms, discrimination reared its ugly head. As for his algorithm on equality in baseball – nonsense. Is the game better off if we have 15 white and 15 black major league managers or general managers? Let’s not offend the Hispanic community by ignoring them. Maybe we need to slice the job opportunities into 10/10/10. What about women? Don’t they deserve equal opportunity in the sports industry? You see where this is going right?

At the risk of offending every man, woman and child on earth, may I offer this bold, but novel, idea: Hire the most qualified candidate for the job. The fact that we — regardless of race, creed, culture, color or gender — are still placing labels on people is indicative of a larger problem: racism.

Racism starts, not on the field or in a blog post, but in the human mind. If there are inequalities they should be addressed, but should MLB (or any other organization) be required to meet a race/gender quota? Isn’t policy founded on this principle the very definition of racism at it root?

I grew up in a small railroad town in upstate New York. My high school graduating class could fit all its members on the front of a t-shirt. Translation: it was small, still is. This means nothing to you. But, for me, it revealed something about my personal experience with race. My entire graduating class was white. My entire neighborhood was white. In my recollection, not a single person that lived and grew up in Mechanicville, New York when I was young was anything other than white.

I was ignorant about discrimination – not by choice, but by circumstance. Until about five years ago, discrimination was a radio talk show subject. It was the central theme of a movie or a television program. My life had never truly intersected with the issue. Then, one summer, I found myself devouring books about Jackie Robinson, Josh Gibson, Buck O’Neil, John Feinstein’s The Punch and Glory Road, the story of Don Haskins and the 1966 Texas Tech basketball team.

The stories led me on a personal journey to discover my personal definition of discrimination. It became clear to me that if I wanted to really know about the subject, well, I better find a subject matter expert. Living in Charleston, South Carolina — home of the well-preserved Slave Market in historic downtown — I was confident I could find athletes who grew up, even made local history, for breaking the “color barrier,” in sports. I did better than that, I found two: Remus Harper and Norman Seabrooks, the Jackie Robinson’s of college athletics in Charleston.

I needed to meet, hear, see and listen to their stories, their experiences, if I had any chance of understanding the painful truth. This exploration led me to write two stories about racism in sports: Citadel Grad Breaks Silence and Stumbling Blocks and Stepping Stones. I encourage you to read their stories. What I learned from these two men is discrimination is not a policy; it’s “a learned behavior,” Harper told me. You can’t create guidelines to stifle discrimination. It is an act that starts in the mind.

Seabrooks, the first African-American to play athletics at The Citadel, taught me a lesson in grace and hope. It took him two decades before he could talk about his experience. When he finally did, Seabrooks said he “noticed something different … progress. You are seeing a generation of kids who are growing up whom, unlike my generation, were exposed to African Americans and others in high school and grade school. I realized, these kids grew up in a world so different from my grade school years that, it’s a new place. To paraphrase Dr. King, people are now being judged on their character, not their skin color.”

The more I listened to Harper and Seabrooks, the more I began to realize Thomas Gray was right, mt ignorance was bliss. There is nothing more powerful than to look in the eyes of discrimination and see the pain; or, listen to the voice and hear the pain. Now, when someone like Chass uses numbers to describe discrimination, I can close my eyes and see a face. I know what discrimination, even racism, sounds like.

Statistics tell a story, but not the story. Sure, siscrimination lives, but there has been progress and there is hope. Is there equal opportunity? The numbers tell us one thing, but history suggests another. We’ve come a long way since Haskins, Robinson, Harper and Seabrooks. Would Robinson be satisfied? I doubt it. Robinson was a competitor; he was never satisfied. Would he quit? Not a chance. As William Seabrook’s told his son Norm, “You’re going to have a lot of tough times in your life, but quitting becomes comfortable when you do it the first time. Once you start quitting it never stops.”

We should never quit the pursuit to right the wrong. But as a whole we must understand, discrimination is not a set of numbers, it’s an act that leaves a deep scar on people’s lives.

Wearing my Ike Davis shirt the last morning, I was approached by an individual asking if I was an Ike Davis’ fan. We immediately struck up a conversation and realized we were both diehard Mets’ fans. He was a 15-game season ticket holder and we would both be attending Opening Day this year.

Suddenly whisked back to the baseball world, we started discussing the Mets and the upcoming season. As the conversation wore on, we both agreed the tide needed to start turning for this franchise soon. After returning home, I continued to think about the discussion and noticed Joel Sherman’s column in the NY Post, in which he calls this season Sandy Alderson’s final mulligan. The conversation I had with the fan in Hawaii was directly related.

He agreed that things needed to change soon for the Mets but didn’t feel that would occur with the Wilpons still owning the team. I found myself taking a more positive approach – that with the likes of Matt Harvey and Zack Wheeler, the future was bright. However, I added that the direction of this team did need to start turning this season, leading to an offseason where Alderson finally opens up the wallets, all en route to at least a semi-competitive team in 2014. Later on, I realized that in essence I was saying this is Alderson’s final mulligan.

And the 2013 season should be Alderson’s final mulligan. However, take it a step further. Since Alderson took over in 2010, the debate regarding the direction and quality of his approach has raged at Citi Field, sports bars and on sports radio. This is the year when we can finally at least start to answer that question Do the young pitchers and prospects continue to develop? Does Alderson add a couple players for the outfield? Does he begin spending some money at the Winter Meetings this offseason?

That question will definitely be answered in 2014 and beyond. However, by this time next season, I think we’ll have a much better idea of whether the Alderson is plan is working or not. And the question at that time will be, “Can you see this team being competitive this season (2014)?

There are far more hideous things in the world than the state of the 2013 Met roster. For instance, what if the Mayans were only off by a few months? Sure how smart could they be if they got annihilated by a bunch of guys in tin hats, but still, it could all end tomorrow, POOF!

We could be hit by a massive wayward asteroid. NASA didn’t even see the one that scared the heck out those Siberians so not a whole lot of faith there — the cosmos kind of snuck that one by them. We could have a zombie apocalypse. That would be bad — though less bad for some. I know I’d be ready – even my kids agree I was made for that sort of thing. My compulsive tendency to hide weapons in convenient places  (a trick I learned on my long walks to I.S. 61) and my agility putting a choke-hold on the dog speak for themselves.

The world could end with another ice age, you could be trampled walking out of Zabar’s staring at your new garlic press by a stampeding herd of Mastodons or you could be flattened crossing the street by a rogue high speed glacier. Or, like those slower than lava Pompeii people, you could end up covered in ash and molten rock, frozen forever in your last act – just as you were about to take a bite of your toaster strudel or obsessing about your fantasy baseball draft order.

Jeez, you’d think we could find other things than the quality of Met outfielders to complain about. Now we’ve got this Higgs Boson particle. Bunch of eggheads at the “Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory” in “Geneva” crashed some stuff together at high speeds and decided our universe is fundamentally unstable and therefore vulnerable to being wiped out by a more stable better looking universe with great hair. My thinking was, you’ve GOT to be kidding me? I just scheduled a teeth cleaning! Unstable universe?

When I was a kid I used to crash trucks together at high speeds all the time but I don’t think it ever resulted in a negative time vortex expanding in every direction at the speed of light. Heck, even the Beltran/Cameron collision of 2005 didn’t trigger a catastrophic chain reaction.

Higgs (not to be confused with “Higgins” from Magnum P.I.), the energy field that gives subatomic particles their mass, is unstable? Unstable how? Like a three legged chair, or like Lindsay Lohan? Is our universe going to pop a bunch of pills and crash a car into a jewelry store? Why would God make our universe unstable? Was he cutting corners? Did he run out of rebar by the time he got to our universe? Maybe we should ask for a refund!?It all makes Daniel Murphy’s oblique injury seem trivial doesn’t it?

We Met fans need to keep things in perspective because honestly, at least we’re not the Marlins. So much complaining about Sandy Alderson, really?

Over the past 30 years the guy has worked for two organizations. The first is a perennial contender that manages to be competitive on a shoestring budget year after year. The second, was a moribund mess when he took over in 2005 and people say he left it not much better in 2009, but here’s the rub, sports fans, when I did an unofficial survey of minor league system rankings on 5 major sports sites, the Padres minor league system was ranked in the top three in every one and was ranked the top system in baseball in 3 of the 5, with comments like “system rife with both depth and quality.”

Yep, rife, that means their system stinks of talent… say your prayers NL West. I wish we were rife. Oakland has had a pretty nice run too, sustainable even. They recycle their seemingly never ending stream of prospects every few years — bringing up talented youngsters and trading off the older and too expensive players for even more prospects. Sound familiar? That’s Sandy Alderson,. That’s who he’s been and that’s what he’s done.

Now fast forward a few years to Fred Wilpon in dire financial straits sitting in Selig’s MLB offices. Bud looks at Fred (who is sweating profusely) and says, “OK Fred, I won’t do you like Frank McCourt because, well… because we’re pals right?”

“Sure Bud, we’re tight, just like this,” says Fred twisting his fingers together.

“But, here’s the thing Fred, you’re going to do me a little favor. These big market bullies, we need to bring them down a notch. This league screams for parity like a 2006 LeSabre with a busted engine rod. I’m going to cut their brake lines and undermine their business model.”

“Freddy my boy, I’m going to make you an offer you can’t refuse. We’re going to show the world how a big market team can succeed using small market methods. We’re going to bring them all down to our cheapskate level. I’ve got this friend of mine I want you to talk to, name of Sandy… He’s in the Dominican right now… Cigar?”

Sure it didn’t go down exactly like that, It probably never even happened, but hey it makes for a good Godfather-like Mets spoof and there’s probably a kernel of truth somewhere in the premise. Namely that Selig’s guy is here to put another organization on an Oakland / San Diego sustainable trajectory.

Things could be a lot worse Met fans. Our farm could still be a shambles. We could be Kansas City having just traded our best prospects for James “I just pitched 8,000 innings” Shields  We could have signed Michael Bourn and Nick Swisher to huge contracts. We could have traded Matt Harvey and Zack Wheeler for Justin Upton.

Instead? We have three ace level pitchers heading our way in Zack Wheeler, Matt Harvey, and Noah Syndergaard, with several other babies in the low minors making some big noise.

We have two division foes in the Phillies and Nationals with acknowledged minor league weaknesses in right-handed pitching. Our strength? You guessed it, right handed pitching.

We finally have a catching prospect who looks like he might be up to the task of ushering in a new era where we’re not getting our asses handed to us by the likes of Shame Beefarino, Chased Mutley and Jimmy “I’ve eaten stacks of pancakes taller than” Rollins. These guys are going down people, like asteroids burning up in the Met stratosphere, like glaciers melting from Met carbon emissions, they’re going to whither like crackling thistles under a wave of molten Met lava, mark my words.

Seriously, If I were Ruben Amaro or Mike Rizzo I’d be concerned with what this Alderson guy is up to. So yeah, things aren’t so bad, they can’t be, not with the tsunami of pitching we have coming our way. My only regret is that we ditched Acosta before I could use my Acostalypse jokes.

January 20th, 1947: Negro League standout Josh Gibson, sometimes referred to as the ‘black Babe Ruth’, dies of a stroke at the of 35. The future Hall of Fame catcher will put to rest in an unmarked grave in Allegheny Cemetery in Pittsburgh.

Unfortunately, one of the best players to ever put spikes on died before the he was able to play in the Major Leagues because of the “gentlemen’s agreement” that banned non-white players from participating in the MLB. Why is Josh Gibson a significant figure in baseball history? He is important since he is probably the best player to never play Major League Baseball.

Gibson suffered a stroke and died in the same year that Jackie Robinson defied all odds and broke the color barrier with the Brooklyn Dodgers. Unlike the MLB, the Negro Leagues felt that it was more profitable for the players to only play a few league games and having the opportunity to make extra money by barnstorming around the country, so their statistics are a little skewed, along with the fact that they didn’t compile complete statistics for games or seasons.

However, the few statistics that were kept during these barnstorming seasons were pretty impressive for Josh Gibson. For example, in 1933, Gibson played in 137 games and hit 55 home runs and compiled a .467 average. The next year, he hit 69 home runs. According to the Hall of Fame, Gibson has a .359 career batting average and approximately 800 home runs in his 17-year career; he also is rumored to have won nine home run titles and four batting titles as a player.

What was most impressive to me was a home run he hit at Yankee Stadium…he hit a ball so far that it was two feet from the top of the wall that circled the bleachers in center field, which is approximately 580 feet.

It’s unfortunate that we’ll never know exactly what Gibson did during his storied career because the Negro Leagues didn’t put together complete statistics or game summaries. Baseball is a game about numbers and statistics, and when we aren’t able to see some to evaluate a player, it puts us in a weird place. Either way, Josh Gibson was a legend during his time, and his legend will live on for many years to come.

Did you enjoy this post? Please feel free to visit On The Way Home at http://on-the-way-home.org to read more of my posts!

For Christmas, I received a great gift from my mother; it was a small book title Fun Facts for Baseball Fans, compiled by Paul Kent. It is a great read because it doesn’t take you all that long to get through, and you learn so much about the game in such a short period of time.

One of the facts that I thought was the most interesting was the amount of professional leagues that were formed before the American and National Leagues were formed, stabilized, and have obviously stood the test of time. It was back in 1839 when Abner Doubleday is credited with inventing the game of baseball in his hometown of Cooperstown, New York. I took another 19 years until fans paid to watch baseball for the first time in 1858. So, as professional baseball became a reality, there needed to be governing bodies present.

Since 1871, Paul Kent noted that there have been seven different leagues that had been in existence:

• National Association (1871-1875)
• National League (1876-present)
• American Association (1882-1891)
• Union Association (1884)
• Players League (1890)
• American League (1901-present)
• Federal League (1914-1915)

Now, if you were like me when I read this, I was thoroughly confused because I never knew that there were five other “major leagues” that were formed and failed. What I also thought was cool was that Kent listed some of teams that eventually moved to the leagues we know today, and told us about the teams that were forever lost to history.

In the American Association, there were four organizations that are still around today that moved to the National League in 1891, which are: the Dodgers, reds, Pirates, and Cardinals. The teams that (thankfully) were lost in history forever from the American Association were: Brooklyn Gladiators, Cincinnati Kelly’s Killers, Columbus Solons, and the Rochester Hop Bitters.

For the short-lived Union Association, some little known teams that didn’t stand the test of time were: the Baltimore Monumentals, Altoona Mountain City, Pittsburgh Stogies, St. Louis Maroons, St. Paul Apostles, and Wilmington Quick Steps. In the Players League, the Brooklyn Wards Wonders, Cleveland Infants, and Pittsburgh Burghers didn’t make the cut.

Finally, the last league Kent touched upon that lost organizations after they folded was the Federal League, which lost the Baltimore Terrapins, Brooklyn Tip-Tops, Buffalo Buffeds, Chicago Whales, Indianapolis Hoosiers, Kansas City Packers, Newark Peps, Pittsburgh Rebels, and St. Louis Terriers.

I don’t know about you, but I had tons of fun just reading all of the ridiculous names of these unsuccessful organizations. If you think that the recent expansion teams names were kind of silly, just take a look back at what the names used to be…it was a lot worse back in the day.

this is part of the reason why baseball is such a wonderful game; there is so much history that goes uncovered by the ordinary fan that you could literally spend days going through and digesting it all. I hope you enjoyed this trip back through time with me, because even though this is the first history lesson, it surely won’t be the last, thanks to these awesome Christmas gifts from my family and loved ones!

Like what you’re reading? Feel free to take a look at my MLB blog titled “On The Way Home“ .

I still remember the day Jose Reyes began his Mets career. June 10, 2003. It was my 20th birthday. Reyes was 19, one day shy of turning 20 himself. He was the first major leaguer I ever saw who was born after me. This would become part of his lure to me and my younger brother, as we would always finish off his list of accomplishments with “dude, he’s younger than me!” Truth be told though, I knew who Jose Reyes was long before he showed up in Texas that day.

As a die hard Mets fan armed with a subscription to Baseball America, I would tell anyone who’d listen just how good he was going to be. Going into the 2003 season he was rated the best shortstop prospect in all of baseball. He was ranked number 3 in Baseball Americas annual top 100 behind only Mark Teixeira and Rocco Baldelli. Accompanied under his name was a blurb that read “Reyes is the Mets’ best everyday prospect since Darryl Strawberry blazed through the system in the early 1980s.” Who cared if the Mets were going through another irrelevant season, I was downright giddy about this kid.

Even as he hacked away at breaking balls in the dirt and fastballs 3 feet over his head that first season, you couldn’t help but notice how talented he was. Obvious was the speed. So was his defense and cannon arm. But not mentioned nearly enough was how quick his bat was. He got his hands around as fast as any Met player I’d ever seen. He seemed to be the rare athlete built entirely of fast twitch muscles. And raw as he was that first season he still managed to hit .330 in July, then .355 that August. “And dude, he’s younger than me!” With all due respect to Mike Piazza, Jose Reyes was my new favorite player.

By 2006, at the age of 23, he hit .300 with 19 home runs, 17 Triples and scored 122 runs. And yet, you still thought he could do more. He’d go 2 for 5, score 2 runs, and steal a base and you’d think “He could have went 5 for 5, he’s swinging at too many first pitches.” It’s a tribute to just how special he was. Watching him in his early 20′s you couldn’t put a cap on his ceiling.

But besides the excitement and talent he brought to the ballpark, his charm only added to his star. Reyes didn’t walk, he bounced. He had elaborate handshakes for everyone. While most players drudged through spring training he skipped around the field like a little kid. Smiling constantly, as though he was doing what he was always meant to. In a game that so many players treat as a job, you get the feeling that no person on earth, beer league softball players and little leaguers included, enjoy being on a baseball diamond more then Jose Reyes does. Even if you didn’t like his undisciplined skill set, he was impossible not to root for.

But still, good as he was, he frustrated you. After two disappointing years in 2009 and 2010, you wondered if this was the finished product. A very good, all star caliber player, but not great. He still swung at too many bad pitches. Made the bone headed play in the field, and would too often have mental lapses on the bases. It became harder to defend him from the people questioning whether he was a “winning player.” He had now been in the Major Leagues for 8 years. This was who he was. Until you remembered, “Dude, he’s younger than me!”

Statistically, a players prime almost always occurs from ages 28-32. Some begin a year or two earlier and some last a few years longer, but almost always, a player has his best seasons during that 5 year window. And like clockwork, Jose Reyes, during his age 27-28 season, finally became the player we always believed he could be. Through the first 3 months he was the favorite for MVP. He hit .354 the first half. Got on base at a .398 clip, finally displaying the plate discipline we had all but given up on. Even after his leg injury, he came back and hit .340 in September. He had finally mastered this game. Just in time to leave us.

As frustrating as it is being a Mets fan, I always appreciated the fact we could afford to keep our home grown players. And up until late Sunday night, the only conceivable tragedy involving Reyes and Wright’s careers would have been the Mets never winning a Championship with the two franchise players. You would never imagine either one of them leaving the team because of financial reasons. Certainly not in their prime. That doesn’t happen to big market teams. That’s a fate reserved for the Kansas Citys and Pittsburghs of the world. It’s why I always hated that there was a debate about re-signing Reyes in the first place. Because you don’t debate your home grown stars. You lock them up and get on with building your team. Reyes’ re-signing always should have been a tiny blurb buried in the sports section, a quick paragraph detailing the contract amongst other Mets notes. A 30 second snippet on Sports Center. Much like the Matt Kemp, or Jered Weaver re-signings. It never should have been big news. Because it was always supposed to happen.

Most players you draw a line in the sand with. Ollie Perez, Luis Castillo, Jason Bay, KRod. You tell them that this is what you’re willing to offer, and they can take it or leave it. You even do that with past their prime favorites like the Yankees did with Jeter a year ago. But you don’t do that with a 28 year old franchise player. You bend a little for him. The fact the Mets were willing to go 5 years for Reyes and not 6 is even more maddening. Wait, so it was O.K. to have a 33 year old Reyes but 34 was too old? “That jump from 33 to 34 is a real doozy.” Please! Stars are always given longer deals than you’d like. Because it’s the only way to get/keep them on your team, thats the nature of baseball contracts.

And while Reyes statistics may not have been worth 106 million (although his 2011 was) he possessed an intangible that could never be quantified in a statistic. He sold tickets. He sold Jerseys. He was the face of the franchise and most popular player. You didn’t miss a Reyes at bat. When the Mets were sitting 10 games out in September you’d always make sure to flip back every few minutes to see when he was batting. And in a game that has become less and less appealing to a younger generation, one that seems to prefer the fast pace of basketball and football, Reyes was an exception. Not only was he electric, but he was an absolute joy to watch. Whether it was him giving a pitcher fits on the base paths, legging out a triple, or gunning someone out, he was as exciting as anyone in the game. And the Mets were simply a different team with him on the field.

But I should have seen all this coming. For the 20 years I’ve been a fan of this team there is one thing that they’ve been consistent at year after year: the uncanny ability to screw things up. So it should’ve been no surprise that a franchise which has made a habit of signing players well past their prime, would allow their most talented player to leave just as he is entering his.

I know fans are supposed to root for the uniform and thats it. The players are interchangeable. And for the most part that is my thinking. While I root for guys like Murphy, Niese, Davis, and Duda, I can’t say I’ll be shedding any tears if they leave. But Reyes was always different. He was one of the few prospects that didn’t disappoint you. From the moment you saw him play you knew there was something special about him. The lightning quick hands, the sprinters speed, his ability to throw 90 mph while letting the ball go from his ear. And that million dollar smile of his, dancing around in the dugout. No player was easier or more enjoyable to root for. They simply don’t make many like him. He truly was a once in a generation talent. And thats why it’s so painful.

As a Mets fan I’ve become used to my place in the baseball universe. I long ago stopped hoping for top free agents. I never asked for Pujols or Prince, CC or Cliff Lee. I’m not asking to be the Yankees, Red Sox, or even the Phillies. Really, I just want my Shortstop back.

This Fan Shot was submitted by Noah Rainwater. Have something you want to say about the Mets? Share your opinions with over eleven-thousand Mets fans who read this site daily. Send your Fan Shot to GetMetsmerized@aol.com.

This spring, there is a tug of war going on between the diehard Mets fans on both sides of the proverbial fence. Some say they are optimists and see the Mets as post season contenders, while others say they are realists and consider the upcoming season to be a bust. The battle between Optimism and Realism has begun to take on a life of its own.

For the purpose of full understanding, the word ‘Optimism’ means: a disposition or tendency to look on the more favorable side of events or conditions and to expect the most favorable outcome.

Conversely, the word ‘Realism’ means: interest in or concern for the actual or real, as distinguished from the abstract, speculative, etc;  the tendency to view or represent things as they really are.

I don’t tend to take spring training numbers too seriously because of the many things that are going on behind the numbers themselves; adjusting arm slots, new batting stances, adding secondary pitches, coming back from injuries. The Mets starters have given up 65 total runs in 76.2 innings. I admit that this does not ring confidently in most Met fans’ ears especially after last season. But at what point do we look toward the 162 games in front of us in a matter of days? One of the big arguments is that fans are looking at these pitchers in ST and not seeing anything change from last year. One can’t have it both ways. Either you see validity and importance in the ST numbers or you look to the regular season as the numbers that count.

Deal or no deal? Would you feel more at ease if the “Big Three” shut down every batter they face but then when they face continuous ML-ready competition, they gave up meatballs constantly? Or would you prefer them to do what they have done this spring and then when the Opening Day bell rings, they compete? The tough part about this scenario is that we don’t see the fullness of the picture. They are still playing Spring Training games. Not one regular season game that counts has been played yet. From what I hear, Jerry and Omar don’t even know for sure who will be in the bullpen, or the starting roster, barring a few exceptions. That’s still to be determined. The fact that Niese is being discussed on March 30th as the possible #3 starter, then Maine discussed as the #2 on March 31st, the claiming of Manny Acosta from waivers, and the impending return of Henry Owens says to me that they are still scrambling to make changes to the makeup of the team. So how serious can we judge the total picture in March? C’mon, how many of you knew with no doubt that Green and Parnell would be heading to Buffalo? If you’re honest, most of us had no idea. You heard how the Mets raved about them and you figured them a lock, too.

Optimism is what the Met fans see in the potential of guys like Mejia, Takahashi, a renewed and healthy Reyes and Beltran, the newly acquired Jay-Bay, a revitalized D-Wright, and young bats like Chris Carter, Ike Davis, F-Mart, Russ Adams, and Ruben Tejada. The optimists are looking at what they have and expect a favorable outcome, such as a Wild Card berth and higher than the much-projected 4th place finish in the NL East. Realism is those concerned with what is actually there. They represent the things that are actually there. But the realists’ scope is a small sample set because all they can see is ST performances against mainly minor league competition. Is this enough to make the realists’ case for a Mets team that is not good enough for the postseason? Is any other data or information needed before making a final determination?

Reality is when you look at the Mets, you see a team with a winning ST record. Why doesn’t that excite the realist? Real numbers, real results. Wins. The reason why the fans that consider themselves realists and say that the Mets current team has no chance and they will be in 4th place at season’s end is because they don’t see the full picture. My intended point is that the realists can’t possibly win this war over optimism until the battle is actually over. I will even revert back to a comment I made and still make today. Give the “Big Three” 20 games into the regular season before we determine what is real. Let’s say Friday, April 30th to be exact. This should give them approximately three starts a piece. We don’t need much more than that to see if what we have is a mirage which will culminate into a 4th place finish and another disappointing season or if what we have, with the implemented changes, is a real chance at contention in the East and possibly into the playoffs.

Optimists, realists, the floor is yours. Keep it clean and respectful. Make your points. Share your opinions. As far as I’m concerned, the war belongs to the optimists until and perhaps after April 30th for that matchup against the Phillies.By then, all of our starters would have registered three starts each and we will know at that point, if the Optimists or the Realists got it right.

Ultimately, I just want our Mets to compete and to realize their full potential; A World Championship back in the City That Never Sleeps. Orange and Blue Till I Die.

Will Sommer: What inspired you to write your book “The Magnificent Seasons?”

Art Shamsky: Well the book is really about three special teams. I realized about 20 years after we had won that there was so much interest in the ’69 Mets. And it was a year where all three of the teams, the Jets, the Mets and the Knicks, or that period of time, all were underdogs and had never won before. If you look back in the history of New York professional sports, the Jets had never won before and the Knicks had never won a championship before and, of course, the Mets had never won one before, so I saw how people were still, 20 years later, were still coming out to see the ’69 Mets, and I realized that it was a very, very special team, and knew that the Jets and the Knicks were also very special teams and that each team had its own set of characters. Of course, the Jets had Joe Namath and were really huge underdogs, as we were; and the Knicks had an array of stars, including Willis Reed and Bill Bradley and Dave Deboucher and Dick Barnett, and Walt Frazier; and even though they weren’t as big as underdogs as we were, they were still not favored to win because they were playing in the championship against a Los Angeles Laker team that had Will Chamberlain, Jerry West, and Elgin Baylor. So it was an exciting time for New York sports.

It was a terrible time for New Yorkers and many people around the country and the world because of the war in Vietnam and a lot of things that were going on. And so I just thought it was really a book that I think people would enjoy learning about these teams and learning about how three of us were underdogs and won. And then I put it in the backdrop of what was going on in the city and the country and the world at the time, using some timeline events to show how important these teams were, particularly to New Yorkers, but people all over the country who followed the exploits of these teams and really followed them as underdogs. And then I think it really made people look at everything in perspective. If we could win, things could get better for them, too; and I think that’s really why I wanted to write it.

Will Sommer: When did you realize that all three teams were underdogs, and all three teams upset a Baltimore team at one point?

Art Shamsky: Well, we were the second team to win. The Jets won January 12, 1969, and then we had all spring and summer to see how exciting that was for them. And then when we won in October (I think we won October 16, 1969.) it was the Knicks’ turn. And quite honestly, I think even the New York Rangers had a chance to win also. I think they went to the finals that year, which would have been incredible for four teams to win; but I think after we won, the Knicks kind of didn’t feel any pressure, but I think they just saw that there was an opportunity for them because, heck, if the Jets could win and we could win, so could they. And they certainly had, of the three teams on paper, they had the best chance to win. We were really underdogs to the Baltimore Orioles, and the Jets were underdogs to the Baltimore Colts, and I think the Knicks beat the Baltimore Bullets in the quarter finals. As good as it was for New York’s sports, it was tough for Baltimore sports teams because they had lost to all of us.

Will Sommer: During the ‘69 season, Did the Mets have a sense that it wasn’t just about baseball because so many of your fans either had relatives or friends fighting in the Viet nam War – - did you have a greater sense of pride?

Art Shamsky: You know, it’s interesting, I talked to everybody who was part of those winning teams and asked them if they knew what was going on, and obviously they knew. They knew that the world was going through some really tough times. Remember now, in 1968 when the Jet season started, you had two assassinations in this country and all sorts of social unrest with the Democratic Convention in Chicago was turned into all sorts of problems and then we got into ’69 with the war in Viet Nam really going through people’s minds. And then in ’70 when the Knicks won, just to use a timeline event, I think they won in May 7 or 8, and two days before they one, or three days before they won, they had the shootings at Kent State University where five students were killed by the National Guard, and nine were injured; so it was just really difficult times, and I think… I don’t want to say “coincidence,” I think it was really something very special as after the Jets won, then we won, and the Knicks, that you had these three teams really doing some incredible things and really, if you stop and think about it. You weren’t there, but I’m sure you’ve read about all these things, but if you look at those teams when Joe Namath running off the field after they won Super Bowl 3 with his finger pointed up to the sky, and then when Cleon Jones catches the last out of the ’69 World Series and basically goes down to one knee; and then Willis Reed running on the court, game 7 against the Lakers when nobody thought he was even going to play, those are icon moments in the history of sports, particularly in New York City. So I think those three things are just symbolic of what it meant to the City of New York, and again, people in the country who followed these teams, because I know Mets fans are all over the United States. Some of the transplanted New Yorkers are moved to other places, so even back in the late sixties, so we were being followed by many people all over the country, and I just think it was a situation where… You may never see again in professional sports, where a city has three championship teams, and particularly teams that never won before.

Will Sommer: How long did it take to write your book? 

Art Shamsky: I thought about it for a long time, but the actual writing of it took about a year. I spent many, many hours at the New York City Public Library doing research on events that took place in the ‘60s, late ’60s, particularly ’68, ’69, and ’70. And the interviews… I did over a hundred interviews and they were time-consuming. Basically, the interviews themselves, while they took some time, just translating them onto a computer and putting them on word-processing took a lot of time. And then picking out particular answers that I thought were prevalent to what the book was trying to do. So all in all it took about a year, but it was really a labor of love. I really enjoyed doing it and was lucky enough to have tremendous cooperation with not only the players who were on the winning teams, but players who were on some of the losing teams. And then I also interviewed politicians, newscasters, sportscasters, Viet Nam veterans, and was lucky enough to get Joe Namath and Bill Bradley and Tom Seaver to do the forwards; and I got Bob Costas, the great sports announcer, to do the intro. So I had – - And really, the great artist, LeRoy Neiman, was nice enough to let me use some of his artwork to put on the cover. So you had that combination of people involved that was really terrific for me.

Will Sommer: The Mets were a last-place team from ’62 to ’68. Did you guys have any feeling in spring training of ’69 that you would be World Series champions?

Art Shamsky: Probably, if anybody would have said that, you would have said they’re crazy based on what we had done before. I came over to the team in ’68 from the Cincinnati Reds along with some other players. Gil Hodges came over around the same time in terms of being named manager of the Mets, and although there was a nucleus of young pitchers, really it was really a team that had been known as the “Loveable Losers,” particularly from the first few years. The first year in existence in 1962, they lost 120 games. I mean it’s very hard to believe a team could lose 120 games. And I think because of that, people just expected the team to lose, and then the event that happened in subsequent years where the Mets really didn’t play well, I think fans just came out and started to – - just came out to the game to see them lose, to see them screw up and do things on the field, whether it be base-running or just trying to catch balls and stuff; and then I think really what by us winning in ’69, and in 1968 we finished in 9th place a half game out of 10th. There was only one division, then in 1969 they went to two divisions. But I think by finishing 9th, almost in last place, it made the victory in 1969 so much better. If you are unexpecting to win, and you do win, and people don’t think you can win, and you still win, that victory is so much more sweeter than it would have been if you were expected to win, and it was a different situation. But by not having played well their first seven years in existence and coming off 1968 where the team, even though they had some good young pitchers, really wasn’t considered a contender. And then to go ahead and win it all the next year, I think that victory is why that team is so special now, even 40 years later. The legacy of that team lives on forever because people appreciate what that team accomplished, and the cast of characters who made up the team.

Will Sommer: When, during the season, did you starting thinking as a team, “Hey, we have a shot of running the tables”?

Art Shamsky: I think even at this point 40 years ago in July, I don’t think we really thought we could win the Division. We were still, I think, as of August 1, nine games behind the Chicago Cubs in the National League East. And there was no wild card back then. Only the two teams from the division who won the division would play in the playoffs. So I don’t think really we started thinking about that until really the middle to the 3rd week of August when we knew we were on a roll because I think from the middle of August on, we were almost unbeatable; and as we got into September, we knew that we were playing very well and that all sorts of things are possible. Now, the thing I think that really is important here is to understand that this was a team that got help every night from a different person basically. It really was the epitome of a team victory in a sense because, if you look back on the box scores, it wasn’t just one person, although guys were having some really good years. Cleon Jones was hitting 340 and Tommie Agee was having a great year, but there was also guys like Kenny Boswell, and Ed Charles, and Wayne Garrett, and Donn Clende non, and Ed Kranepool, and Jerry Grote, and J.C. Martin, who were really contributing; myself and Ron Swoboda. It seemed like there was a different person doing something to help us win a ballgame, and I think people remember that. People remember the names of the players on that team because they were treated to different people contributing to that victory.

Will Sommer: Basically the polar opposite to this year’s team.

Art Shamsky: Well, it’s not over yet. That’s how I, you know, who knows what’ll happen. Think about baseball, and particularly the National League East this year is that basically the National League East, although the Phillies are on a roll right now, it’s not a tremendously strong division. So if you still stay within contention, there’s enough teams that you’ll be playing over the course of the year that you should be able to beat. Now whether they do that or not, that’s a different story, but if you can stay in somewhat contention, at least into September, you never know what can happen; and when the Mets get some people back healthy, that they might be able to play a little better.

Will Sommer: When people think of the 1969 Mets, they think of Seaver, Koosman. Who, in the clubhouse, was the unsung hero in 1969?

Art Shamsky: You know, that might be true what people think, but we wouldn’t have won without Cleon Jones, and we wouldn’t have won without Tommie Agee. We might not have won without Donn Clendenon. I mean, if you look at the people on that team, the players on that team, again as I said before, everybody contributed to something. But look at what Tommie Agee did that year. He led off and, I think, and hit 26 homeruns leading off, plays he made defensively in the outfield. Cleon Jones hitting 340. You look at the platoons that were out there. He platooned in right field, Gil Hodges; he platooned in first base, platooned in second base, he platooned in third base, and he platooned at times behind the plate. So you had what is that? Five positions where he was getting at least ten people in the games playing and doing things to help win. And everybody did contribute. I mean, when I wasn’t playing and Swoboda was, he was doing it. And when Clendenon wasn’t playing, and Kranepool was, they were doing it. And the same went along with Weis and Boswell at second base, and Garrett and Charles at third base, and also J.C. Martin and Grote. The thing about Grote though, he was the best defensive catcher I ever saw, great defensive catcher. So we were strong up the middle defensively, catcher, short, second, and third base, no matter who was playing. So an unsung hero, you can name a lot of guys. I mean I could go down the list and there would be, it would be 15 to 20 guys who I think were unsung heroes. But the fact remains that their names are remembered by everybody who have some memory of that 1969 championship team.

Will Sommer: And my final question is: Do you plan on attending the celebration on August 22nd?

Art Shamsky: My plans were to attend it, but I’m not sure. I had a conflict with something that I was committed to out of town, and I’m not sure I’ll be able to make it; but if I’m not there, my soul will be there and I’m hoping that’ll be a wonderful weekend, but I’m doing my best to be there.

Editors note: This was originally posted on Mets Fans Forever