Aardsma was originally drafted by the San Francisco in the first round of the 2003 amateur draft.

He has spent parts of seven seasons in the major leagues with five different teams. most recently with the Yankees in 2012.

Aardsma owns a career 4.22 ERA in 255 appearances all in relief. After the Yankees released him early last month, he signed with the Miami Marlins on April 13 and then was released again on May 15.

He will report to Triple-A Las Vegas. This might get ugly…

The most famous No. 1 in Mets’ history has some advice when it comes to the man who is quickly becoming the most infamous No. 1 on the Mets.

“Give the kid a chance,” Mookie Wilson said Friday when discussing Jordany Valdespin. “He is a very spirited kid, very young and has a lot to learn, no question about that. But some things are being blown out of proportion. I think we need to back up and not overanalyze everything.”

That’s what Mookie told Bill Price of the Daily News.

“I do know the kid personally,” said Wilson. “I’ve had the opportunity to work with him for a limited time. I think we need to give everyone an opportunity to explain themselves and what is really happening.”

“They are struggling right now and I think that’s expected when you have young players and players coming in from other organizations. This is similar to what the Mets went through in the early ‘80s. Winning was not a frequent thing, we didn’t see the results of our labor, but in 1983 we were starting to be in games. I see that with the Mets now.”

And the beat goes on…

UPDATE:

Matt Cerrone of MetsBlog writes moments ago:

However, no team can guarantee success, regardless of who they sign, trade for or develop. They can only guarantee that New York’s media will continue to push on a story until it bleeds, because they know it will sell and people will read and listen… which is exactly what we’ve seen this week with this Valdespin and Collins story.

Is he kidding me?

What is going on over there…

There are many adjectives that are used in conjunction with the 86 Mets. Confidence. Arrogance. Swagger. Obnoxious. But they were good, damn good. And they knew it. That’s a far cry from the 2013 Mets.

However, it’s not just wins that count. It’s playing as a cohesive unit. It’s playing as, no pun intended, a TEAM. And that is something this club does not do. You don’t have to get along off the field. You don’t even have to like it each other. But when you’re on that field, you play as a team. You fight as a team. The Jordany Valdespin situation shows in glaring fashion how incredibly dysfunctional this “team” is.

The 86 club was a bawling and brawling brazen bunch of ballplayers chasing women and partying. But there were exceptions. For all intents and purposes, Gary Carter was an outcast. He was a family man, religious and clean-cut. Heck, the guy was so pure he did a commercial for Ivory soap. Mookie Wilson was one of the longest tenured players on that club. Yet, he graciously accepted becoming a platoon player with Lenny Dykstra. Or moving to left. But yet, they won. 108 times. The 4th highest win total in the last 50 years.

That club had issues. No doubt about it. Darryl referred to Wally Backman as a “(expletive) redneck.” In his 1985 book, “Bats,” Davey Johnson referred to Dykstra as “an ***hole kind of guy.” When they were posing for their team picture in the spring of 1987, Keith Hernandez and Strawberry came to blows about seating proximity to Davey. What is this, 3^rd grade? But yet, on the field, they pulled together.

After being chided with chants of “Daaaah—ril” in Fenway, Straw answered back. In the 8^th inning of Game 7, it was he who hit a towering blast off of Al Nipper that was the final nail in the Sox coffin. And then he strolled around the bases in probably the longest HR trot in history. Confidence. Swagger. The following spring Nipper beaned Darryl. And the dugouts promptly emptied. Who else but the Mets could get in a bench-clearing brawl in spring training? Straw was not overly popular with some of his teammates. But they immediately came to his defense. Why? Because that’s what teams do. That’s what winners do.

When Valdespin gets set-up by his manager to get plunked, what do the 2013 Mets do? They sit on their ass. And then rub salt in the wound by condoning the actions of the Pirates.

This is a team?

Baseball is filled with players that did not get along off the field. But yet, they pulled together and they won. The Oakland A’s of the early 70s bickered constantly. Yet, they won 3 straight World Series. Barry Bonds and Jeff Kent loathed each other. But they put their differences aside and gave their team 2 division titles and 1 pennant over 6 seasons. Ruth and Gehrig were polar opposites who disapproved of the other’s lifestyle. Yet, the Yankees of the 1920’s and 30’s seemed to do okay. And how about ‘The Bronx Zoo’ of the late 70’s. Those guys not only clashed off the field but on the field. And in the dugout on national TV. When Reggie Jackson wasn’t avoiding being punched by Billy Martin, he was getting into it with Thurman Munson. Talk about a dysfunctional mess! But yet, the Yankees won 5 divisions, 4 pennants and 2 World Series over a 6 year span.

The Mets, meanwhile, bicker amongst themselves. Then, go out and lose.

Did Valdespin act bush league by hitting that HR and then showboating on a very small scale? Did he act inappropriately for a rookie? Personally, I don’t give a damn. He’s a New York Met and as such he should be defended by his, pardon the pun, “team” mates. Terry Collins set him up to get beaned. I guess we should be thankful Collins allowed him to wear a batting helmet.

Had any other rookie done that they’d be praised for trying to light a spark on a team where no spark exists. Last season Bryce Harper played with arrogance rarely seen in a rookie. And although Valdespin is no Harper, I don’t recall Harper getting blowback from his teammates. He gets praised while Valdespin gets violently slammed in the face by John Buck. John Buck who is on his 4^th team in the last 5 years. John Buck who will be riding the pine once D’arnaud arrives. Can you imagine back-up catcher Ed Hearn violently slamming a pie into the face of Lenny Dykstra? I can’t either.

Kevin Mitchell was a rookie in 86. Does anyone think had Mitch been purposely beaned like that, the Mets would not have retaliated? Tell me Bobby Ojeda wouldn’t have had someone kissing the dirt the next inning. In 1969 Wayne Garrett was a rookie. Garrett was unassuming and quiet. But can you imagine Gil Hodges setting up Garrett to get beaned? I can’t either.

Why should we expect the 2013 Mets to fight the other teams in the NL when they don’t even fight for each other?

You can clearly see the dissension on this “team” by some of the quotes of Valdespin’s “team” mates.

Latroy Hawkins: “What, now we’re supposed to get into a fight for that?” First of all, I didn’t even know Hawkins was still in the majors until the Mets found him on the scrap heap. Secondly, to answer your question, Latroy, yes. Yes you are.

Marlon Byrd: “The Pirates did what you’re supposed to do. We would have done the same thing.” With all due respect, Marlon, I disagree. When was the last time the Mets protected one of their own and retaliated?

If the Mets are going to lose, at least lose with some dignity. Losing is one thing. Being a doormat is unacceptable.

And to David Wright, you’re the captain. Avoid the politically correct statements and settle this in the clubhouse. You’ve got that “C” on your jersey. Now act like a captain. I can’t imagine Keith or Gary or John Franco allowing this to fester. Isn’t it David who said, “You play for the name on the front of your jersey, not the one on your back.”

One vivid memory of 86 was the all-out bench-clearing brawl when Ray Knight decked Eric Davis in Cincinnati. Dugouts emptied…except for one player. Former Red George Foster sat on the bench and watched the Mets fight his old team. And although Foster was the 2^nd highest paid player on the team (and yes, an outcast even before), GM Frank Cashen had no problems immediately getting Foster out of New York. Why? He realized that Foster was not a team player.

Thank goodness Alderson was not the GM in 86. He would’ve kept Foster and gotten rid of Ray Knight.

And ask yourself this: What’s easier to imagine—a guy like Valdespin fitting in with the 86 Champions…or a guy like Keith Hernandez fitting in with the 2013 Mets?

So, to Valdespin, I say, hang in there. Your time here is probably limited. The fact that you’re exciting, try to light a spark and want to win, is clearly not in synch with the 2013 Mets. Management wants everyone to be nice and quiet. We don’t want to upset anyone else in the league.

Shhh. Heaven forbid someone gets mad at us. So, sit tight, Jordany. We’ll probably get rid of you like we did Beltran or Pagan. You know, two ex-Mets who escaped this madness. Two ex-Mets now wearing or pursuing World Series rings. Yes, World Series rings, something Terry  Collins can only view on Google Images.

The real issue when considering competitive balance is revenue.  Some teams make a lot more of it than others by nature of their location, their fan base, and access to media outlets. I’ve always been puzzled by the notion of competitive balance at the micro-economic level. Isn’t the nature of competition such that the better organization and the better team should win? I understand that parity is good for the game, but if we really wanted it to be fair wouldn’t we have to rig a system where every team wins the World Series in a set order once every thirty years? How do measures that “level the playing field” not detract from inherent competitive advantages that are earned and deserved? Isn’t survival of the fittest a free market principle? Big markets should have an advantage, they have more people in them, and they pay higher prices.

If on the other hand you look at Baseball on the macro-economic level, as a single sprawling coast to coast business, then things begin to look a little different. You could argue that the scarcity of a brand in multiple smaller markets offers room for growth that makes up for whatever an already profit maximized big market may bring to the table. Competitive balance also makes for more interesting games which makes it essentially a quality control measure. No one enjoys watching the Yankees perennially steamroll the rest of the league (except Yankee fans of course).

Revenue sharing was first instituted in 1996 to help combat growing revenue disparities among MLB franchises. Based on 2012 revenues, $400 million will change hands from the big MLB markets to the small in order to level the playing field. The money is distributed on a sliding scale, which means that teams near the bottom of revenue generated, will receive significantly more than the $27 million average that would be distributed if that money were spread evenly across the bottom 15 teams. Ideally revenue sharing allows small market teams more flexibility in retaining home grown stars that they’ve poured development dollars into.

But revenue sharing hasn’t always worked the way it was intended to. Back in 2009 Maury Brown published an eye opening look at just how much money revenue sharing brought to small markets. He showed, for instance, that the Marlins received $20,946,573 and $21,030,000 in 2002 and 2003, while the Mets paid out -17,366,067 and -21,473,000 on those same years respectively. In 2008 and 2009 the Marlins received $47,982,000 and $43,973,000 respectively. Now consider this for a moment, the Marlins in 2008 had a team payroll of $27,003,450.00 which means the Marlins in 2008 pocketed over 20 million in revenue sharing dollars after payroll expenses. Doesn’t seem fair does it?

The new CBA will change revenue sharing in the coming years to address this very issue. The union requested a new rule that connects revenue-sharing money to big league payroll. In a report by Jason Stark of ESPN in November of 2011, he explained that teams receiving revenue-sharing money are now required to reflect a 40-man roster payroll 25 percent larger than the amount they’re receiving. So, if a team’s revenue-sharing check is for $40 million, their big league payroll needs to be at least $50 million. Also, by the end of this labor deal (2016), teams in the 15 largest markets will no longer receive revenue-sharing money, no matter how low their revenue may be. The 15 teams that will be ineligible for revenue sharing by 2016 are the Yankees, Mets, Dodgers, Angels, Cubs, White Sox, Phillies, Red Sox, Rangers, Braves, Nationals, Blue Jays, Astros, Giants and A’s.

The problem for many, particularly those on the Player’s Association end, is that MLB continues to register record profits while payrolls have failed to keep pace. Between local network outlets and national media contracts (a deal with Fox was recently valued at $12.4 billion over eight years to be divided across all 30 MLB teams) the sport is seeing unprecedented growth. Maury Brown reported in April of 2011 that gross MLB revenues have jumped from $1.4 billion in 1995 to $7 billion in 2010, a 400% increase. When accounting for inflation, the league still sees a phenomenal 254% increase, and yet many teams have failed to invest these profits proportionately into added payroll. Revenue sharing was supposed to address that problem but it clearly has not.

Scott Boras isn’t happy about it. According to Boras, most teams have lower payrolls heading into the 2013 season than the highest payroll those teams had from 2000-2012. “Only five teams have higher payrolls,” Boras told Murray Chass in a Jan 2013 article. “Everybody else is below even though revenue is up 200 percent and franchise values are up 300, 400 percent. What we’re seeing is not many teams are spending on payrolls despite the fact that their profits are extraordinary. You’d expect teams to have their highest payrolls, but they don’t.” Boras offered these examples:

In spite of revenue sharing, record profits, and media deals sprouting up left and right, Major League teams have failed to invest in players, according to Scott Boras. Is this in fact the case?

Wendy Thurm of Fangraphs recently did a nice analysis of payroll fluctuations. Below are two graphics that she employed.

In the first graph you can see that revenue has indeed outpaced payroll, however, the second graphic is interesting because the year to year percentage changes in both MLB revenue and payrolls do not always reflect a similar trajectory. From 2003 to 2005 revenue rose steadily then remained relatively high while payroll dropped precipitously. Then from 2005 to 2006 payroll showed a 20% spike. From 2007 to 2008 payroll and revenue were both declining on a parallel course reflecting the economic downturn, but from about 2009 on, payroll and revenue deviate, crisscross, then begin to slowly rise in unison from about 2011 to the present. In her well articulated piece, Thurm makes the argument that while many teams have cut back (even in the wake of record profits), others have used this money to dramatically increase their payrolls. She cites teams like the Nationals and Detroit as examples. Personally I don’t see it so much. While I can see the argument derived from the second graph where payroll and revenue seem to follow parallel trajectories, there are two major deviations on that graph where payroll was far below revenue, and there are also teams like the Marlins that continually appear to invest a far smaller percentage relative to revenue growth.

Teams like the Mets on the other hand, which were one of Boras’ culprits, have cut back repeatedly over the past 4 years while media proceeds have risen. The Mets received an estimated 60 million last year for their share of MLB’s national media dollars, their SNY network continues to appreciate and continues to generate revenue, they play in NY, and yet the team’s payroll ranked 19th out of 30 teams.

The odd conclusion here is that for some teams, the market dynamic isn’t responding the way it’s supposed to. Many small market teams are making out like bandits while teams like the Mets aren’t faring well at all. The Mets should not be losing money, they should not have had trouble managing their debt and they should be awash in cash as they reside in the biggest baseball market in the world, but the Wilpons were so damaged by losses through their association with Madoff and the depreciation of their real estate holdings, and they accumulated such a massive debt load from their new stadium, they reached a point where they were unable to invest in payroll on a level commensurate with the rest of Major League baseball. In retrospect, the lack of any semblance of prudent economic foresight demonstrated by Met ownership is truly astonishing. To add to their problems the Mets’ massive market wasn’t (still isn’t) helping them at the gate, as fans simply stopped showing up. Revenue continued to spiral down and here we are looking at a crappy on-field product, empty stands and a seemingly perpetual limited budget.

Eventually the Wilpons may be pressed into boosting payroll if they are to get themselves off of Boras’ list. No matter how much media money they manage to procur, if they keep losing money at the gate my guess is they’ll eventually have to sell the team. Sure, maybe the small marketers will herald a Met turnaround generated via their resurgent farm system, but barring that, the Wilpons are going to have to splurge. The striking thing about Boras’ list is that with the exception of the Rays and the Braves, every team on it has had a losing record over the period of time referenced on the chart. Clearly, teams that cut salary don’t fare well. The Mets simply can not keep pace with the rest of the league if during a time of plenty they continue to impose restrictions. At some point they’re going to have to invest if they’re to bring the fans back, even if it means betting the house.

I enjoyed stopping by his locker to shoot the breeze for a minute or two, talking about things other than baseball. Very smart, clever and possessing an insight on numerous issues. When there was the inevitable blow up or moment of absurdity, Ventura was always there to put it into perspective with a quip as short and hard-hitting as his swing.

Once I asked him about his fight with Nolan Ryan, and his response was he knew he had made a mistake halfway out to the mound, but couldn’t turn around. You’ll even notice in the video he slowed down.

Was it an embarrassing moment? Yes, but years later he handled it with humor. He even joined with Ryan to autograph photos of the brawl.

When I covered the Orioles and he was with the White Sox, I’d make time to go over to his clubhouse for a few moments. He was accessible to anybody who would take the time to ask a question.

I am sure there will be a lot of questions for Ventura pre-game tonight when he brings his White Sox into town. There will be rehashing about his time with the Mets and Yankees, about being in New York during September 11 and what he remembers about Mike Piazza’s homer the first game back in the city.

He’ll also get a question or four about his grand-slam single against the Braves in the 1999 playoffs.

That night is one of the greatest team displays of enthusiasm outside of winning a championship I have ever seen. That, and I suppose, the Piazza post 9-11 homer. Both were amazing to watch.

Ventura wasn’t a five-tool player, but was consistent and clutch. With a runner in scoring position you wanted him at the plate because he’d usually make contact.

Ventura was a .267 lifetime hitter and only once hit over .300, that being .301 in 1999, his first season with the Mets. Considering his 66-game hitting streak in college, I always wondered if he thought he should have hit for a higher average. He also hit 32 homers with a career-high 120 RBI in his first year with the Mets.

What the Mets wouldn’t give for a player with that production now.

Ventura had three solid years with the Mets, who, during that span had arguably one of the best defensive infields in history. Few balls got by Ventura, Rey Ordonez, Edgardo Alfonzo and John Olerud.

Both Olerud and Ventura would later play for the Yankees. When they left the Yankees, I believed I’d see both again managing in a major league dugout. I’m still waiting on Olerud.

The Chicago Tribune discussed Tuesday’s homecoming of sorts for Chicago White Sox manager Robin Ventura and his coach Joe McEwing. Both were teammates for two seasons with the Mets including the 2000 team that won the National League, but lost to Yankees in the World Series.

“It was a great time,” said Ventura, who played for the Mets from 1999-2001. “We enjoyed it as a family just being there. The Mets were very good to me. There’s part of it going back, seeing a lot of faces that you’re friends with and happy to see.”

Who can ever forget Ventura’s most signature moment as a Met – The Grand Slam Single…

What a great memory and one that still gives me goosebumps.

The article also mentions that McEwing will be honored while he’s in town and will be inducted into the Irish American Baseball Hall of Fame at Foley’s NY Pub and Restaurant in New York on Tuesday.

“You’re so proud of your background and heritage, and to be inducted into the Irish American Baseball Hall of Fame is an honor I’m humbled by.”

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.

There is five inches of snow with more forecast in Minneapolis where the Mets play tonight. The high for the series is forecast at a blustery 43 degrees. It will be colder with the wind.

I would love to see Twins owner Jim Pohlad sit with Commissioner Bud Selig in short sleeves tonight in a vain attempt to convince us the weather is fine. But, it isn’t and probably won’t be much better next week in Denver, where it also snows any time.

It is true scheduling isn’t about one team but all 30 and you can’t predict the weather. However, it is also true MLB created this issue, and first did so with the increase to 30 teams from 20 when the Mets were born in 1962.

The insistence of a 162-game schedule stretched the season from the first week of April into October. Factor increased playoff rounds with the last two – including World Series – lasting up to seven games and we’re brushing against November.

There’s too much money to be made over 162 games and the playoffs – the vehicle for the networks to shill for their programming – so they won’t think to cut there.

Nonetheless, Major League Baseball made things more difficult for itself with interleague play, and now, interleague play every day of the season.

With interleague play comes the unbalanced schedule, which means not every team runs the same race in a season. By definition, that means the schedule has no integrity to it, thereby making it unfair.

Unfortunately, Selig loves interleague play, so that won’t change, either. Interleague play has become part of Selig’s legacy, and I don’t think in a good way.

I don’t believe MLB’s economic growth is directly attributable to interleague play as it is to the steroid era which brought on the great power numbers; the construction of new stadiums in both leagues; almost 15 years of the Yankees and Red Sox on top which increases everybody’s attendance and TV ratings; better television deals because of cable; and to Selig’s credit, the international marketing of the sport and continued labor peace.

The great influx of money made MLB, its teams and the Players Association willing to accept the playing in horrible conditions, where injuries and pitcher’s arms are at risk. Instead of improved conditions, the players union settled for more money. Seriously, don’t worry about ending a career because you’ve got enough money to retire for life at age 32.

Things happen and weather is unpredictable, but MLB can still do things to put the odds in its favor while keeping most everything it has going for it now, things that came with the cost of tradition.

First, what genius approved an open-air stadium in Minneapolis? There’s inclement weather this time of year in the Northeast and Midwest, but Minnesota is a different animal. It can snow there for another week or so and almost any time in mid-October.

If they weren’t smart enough to build a dome where it snows seven months in the year, then play the Royals or Indians or White Sox in April, teams that are easier to reschedule later.

Yesterday, the Yankees were out of their division and had a rainout in Cleveland for a second straight day. They now will have a doubleheader on an off-day and play 17 games in 16 days. That makes for tired players and poor pitching, but who cares about putting the best product on the field?

“I don’t think you can go to cold weather cities in April if you’re only going to go there once,’’ Yankees manager Joe Girardi said. “I know the schedule’s not easy to make, but if you could just stay in your division longer or go to some warmer weather cities you might be able to get by a lot of this.’’

From a business standpoint, the Indians can’t like playing the Yankees in April, when the crowds are down. They’d rather play them later when there’s a chance for a sellout.

It’s pounding a square peg into a round hole to play interleague and non-divisional play in April. The first two weeks of the season should be within the division so make-ups are easier to reschedule.

I’ve suggested this several times, even talked with players and club officials who believe it is a good idea, and that is the scheduling of day-night doubleheaders.

In this case, MLB can make the unbalanced schedule work to its advantage. Because you’re playing 18 games within the division, have several day-nighters each month. Not only does this give the owners the gates they want, but provides more off-days to make rescheduling easier.

Nobody likes to play in horrible weather conditions, and nobody likes to sit in them, either. However, this is an issue because MLB lacks the willingness or foresight to change something within its control.

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.

This is a great contract for both sides. For Andrus, the obvious financial security in a town he’s familiar with and loves was the selling point. For the Rangers, they lock up one of the best young shortstops in the game through his prime years and the contract expires at just the right time. Jon Daniels saw his approval rating take a huge hit this past winter when he not only failed to acquire a big name that could finally put the Rangers over the top, he also allowed the team’s best player, Josh Hamilton, to leave via free agency to a division rival.

Andrus is one of the best defensive shortstops in the game. At the plate, he’s improved his on-base percentage, slugging percentage and batting average every year since 2010. He owns a 74% success rate stealing bases, which is passable. The Rangers needed to make this happen to infuse some good will back in the franchise, and with a player of Andrus’s caliber, it was a confluence of positives that made everyone a winner.

Everyone except Andrus’s agent, Scott Boras, that is. Well known for taking his clients into free agency and milking every last cent from the owner’s pockets, Boras lost this battle. “We’re the boss,” Andrus said. “I know everybody thinks that about Scott, but it’s different if you’re the one in that position. He works for us. I know he tries to get the best deal that he can, but it comes down to my choice and what’s better for me and my family.”

From one contract extension to the greater chance of another, Yankees second baseman Robinson Cano fired agent Scott Boras on Tuesday and signed with Roc Nation Sports, which partners with Creative Arts Agency (CAA) Sports. Roc Nation is owned by New York über-celebrity Jay-Z. Yankee fans should be happy to learn that Cano will now be represented by Brodie Van Wagenen, who also represents the likes of Matt Cain and the Ryan’s Braun, Zimmerman and Howard. What do they all have in common? Huge contract extensions before they reached free agency, that’s what. Good news for Yankee fans.

Cano is the best second baseman in baseball and would easily receive offers north $200 million on the free agent market. He may still reach that number, but it’s much more likely now that it’s from the Yankees, and will get done before too long.

The Cano situation is fascinating to me because it makes me wonder if Boras is losing sight of the marketing aspect of the decision. When Derek Jeter retires, Cano would be the man on that team and in this town. As Mets fans know, it’s the Yankees’ town, and they just allow the Mets a little space by the East River near an airport. Boras’s job is to get the best deal possible for his client, and he’s been wildly successful over the years, but the client has to think about more than just the terms of the contract.

I remember when LeBron James was mulling over his free agent decision, and the common thoughts were that if he wanted to be loyal, he’d stay in Cleveland. If he wanted to win, he’d go to Miami, and if he wanted to get rich(er), he’d go to New York. So while Boras needs to find out which team can offer the most dollars, Cano needs to find out which city can offer him the best off-the-field endeavors, and it seems he already knew that it was New York or bust. Boras felt that another team could offer more money, as evidenced by the declined offer the Yankees already made to Cano. While that may be true, Cano feels his overall lifestyle would be suited best by New York, so out goes Boras.

I think it’s no small coincidence that Cano immediately signed with an agency that partners with a New York-based marketing company headed by a business mogul worth half a billion dollars.

On a smaller scale, another Boras client, Carlos Gomez of the Brewers, also reached an agreement on an extension just three weeks ago. After a string of losses like this, Boras must be reeling. Maybe now’s a good time for Sandy Alderson to swoop in and lock up Matt Harvey.

The season always started on a Tuesday in Cincinnati and Washington; the home of the sport’s oldest franchise and in the nation’s capital for the national past time.

This year, lost in the midst of the NCAA Tournament, the start of the baseball season begins with Sunday’s highly anticipated Houston Astros-Texas Rangers clash on Opening Night – not Day.

You can’t yawn anymore even if you hadn’t slept in three nights. The hook of Houston moving to the American League is a lot of things, but compelling is not one of them.

Thankfully, baseball didn’t go overseas for Opening Day, as when the Mets played the Cubs in Japan days before every other team, and several years ago the Yankees played Tampa Bay in Tokyo, then returned to Florida for more exhibition games. There might have been worse ideas, but few come immediately to mind.

For a financial fix – the only reason Major League Baseball does stuff like this – the sport traded something unique and cherished for generations in exchange for a check.

This season, Opening Day in Cincinnati is polluted by interleague play with the Angels coming in. Not only is interleague distasteful for Opening Day, but if you’re going to do it, why the Angels?

A good team, yes, but if the weather is awful and the game postponed, the Angels will be scrambling for a make-up date to fly cross-country.

Inane scheduling just as the Padres at the Mets tomorrow. Can’t they see the folly in this?

Baseball’s Opening Day was always special and anticipated. Now, it’s like the NBA and NHL, where some years you pick up a paper and two games have been played before you realize the season started.

The NFL stole the concept of Opening Day when it kicks off its season the Thursday before the first weekend with the Super Bowl champion at home. By the way, good job by the Orioles for telling the Ravens and NFL to take a hike by not rescheduling their game.

It wouldn’t be hard to have Opening Day the day after the NCAA Championship in most years. But, if not, go back to Cincinnati and Washington the first Tuesday in April.

Or, have everybody play that day, and taking a page from the NCAA Tourney, have wall-to-wall games from afternoon to late at night, with conceivably four games, the first starting at 1 p.m., and the last at 10.

Make the whole day, from coast to coast, special.

I want Opening Day back, and in New York, both the Mets and Yankees should have the town to themselves. Not only are they playing on the same day in the city, but the same time.

Nobody thought this was bad idea?

Sure, the times and economics change, but does Major League Baseball have to abandon everything that was once cherished?

Now that we are just about a week out from Opening Day, let’s take a more detailed look at what the Mets will be up against this season. With the new league format in which there are 15 teams in each league, the Mets will have interleague play spread out throughout the year, starting with the Twins the second week in April. In total, the Mets play 20 interleague games, 19 games against each team in the division, and 66 other games within the National League.

To gauge how difficult the Mets’ schedule is, I compiled the 2012 winning percentages and pythagorean winning percentages (what their record should be based on their runs scored and runs allowed) from the 2012 season, and broke down the results month-by-month.

The Mets will start off the season with a very easy schedule, probably their easiest month of the season. With all the injuries right now, they may not be able to capitalize on the easy opponents early, which would make it very difficult to get above .500 for the first time since 2008. Their April opponents had a .476 winning percentage and .479 pythagorean winning percentage, both significantly worse than any month the rest of the season.

Once May starts, the schedule gets a whole lot tougher. During the month of May, the Mets play some tough teams like the Reds, Cardinals, and White Sox. From then on, with the exception of August, the schedule is very, very tough. August is a bit different, as the Mets get to play the Padres, Royals, and Rockies.

There’s more going on here than just 2012 win-loss record, however. Every season, there are teams that see big changes over the offseason, including some on the Mets schedule. Their 2012 records won’t tell the whole story, so the Mets may have some tougher and some easier stretches than last year’s data predicts:

• St. Louis Cardinals- 7 games: The Cardinals hit their way into the postseason last year with a very short-handed roster compared to their 2011 team, which won the World Series. After losing Albert Pujols and Edwin Jackson to free agency along with Chris Carpenter to injury, the rest of the roster stepped up. After losing a few more guys this past winter, however, it looks like it won’t be possible for the Cardinals to repeat what they did last year. They failed to re-sign Kyle Lohse and lost Rafael Furcal to Tommy John Surgery. Those two alone are worth about 5 fWAR between them. Now their closer Jason Motte is hurt as well, possibly seriously. Now a .500 record seem more likely than playoff baseball.
• Cleveland Indians- 3 games: The Indians were extremely aggressive this winter, spending over $120 million in the free agent market. As Mets fans know, they snatched up Michael Bourn on a four-year deal along with Nick Swisher, Brett Myers, and Mark Reynolds. They also made a big move via the trade market, dealing Shin-Soo Choo and three others in a three-team deal, acquiring Drew Stubbs to complete the outfield, as well as top pitching prospect Trevor Bauer. The Mets only have three games for the Indians this season but what previously looked like a possible three-game sweep for the Mets could now be a sweep for Cleveland.
• New York Yankees- 4 games: The Mets meet the Yankees in late-May with a four-game series split between Citi Field and Yankee Stadium. It seems like for years, Mets fans have been saying hopefully that it would be the year the Yankees are finally too old. Well, this may be the year. Alex Rodriguez looks like he could miss the majority of the season. Mark Teixeira could miss much of it as well. For the first time in a while, they stodd pat for the offseason, which will end up really hurting them this year. They are depleted and the guys they have remaining are injury-prone.
• Miami Marlins- 19 games: The Marlins are a completely different team from a year ago. Going into last year, they had a roster with some very big names. Now, the cupboard is completely bare and the team looks terrible. Just looking at fWAR, the players the Marlins lost this winter were worth 18.5 wins last year while their additions totaled just 3.6 wins. The Marlins lost 93 games last season, but they could be well over 100 losses by the time 2013 is over.
• Philadelphia Phillies- 19 games: This is really a tough one. I could really see the Phillies going either way. They could get healthy and make a run at the playoffs, or they could slip into mediocrity and win less than 75. They are the biggest wild card right now in the NL East. The keys for them will by Ryan Howard and Chase Utley. Both haven’t been themselves the past few seasons and as they’ve grown older, their power numbers have dissipated along with their health. It also remains to be seen how much their once-great rotation has left with Vance Worley gone and Roy Halladay not pitching like himself.
  

Even with some opponents looking much worse than last season, the Mets will still have to deal with the Nationals and Braves 19 times each, which will be very tough with the improved rosters those two organizations put together. We’ll see how it all plays out. If there’s one thing the Mets have to do, however, if they want any shot at making noise in the Wild Card race, it’s play well early on.

We have to remember that the Mets are a business and a franchise, that while their “brand” is the New York Mets, they also represent MLB and they were not about to allow the National League’s Gotham City franchise to sink into bankruptcy. No way, no how.

Alderson’s mission, was not to create a winning product in New York or to bring a World Series to Flushing, his mission was to put the NY Mets organization back on the path to profitability. That’s it, nothing else. Many of us lament the fact that Alderson let established stars depart, that he’s failed to exploit free agency — but these may very well be obsolete paradigms. Free agency is going to be greatly diminished in the coming years.

The most successful teams will be the teams who can develop a steady stream of talent from their minor league systems. Small market operations  will get a leg up by utilizing legal devices designed to help them secure elite talent in the draft. Revenue sharing dollars for big markets? Gone. The practicality of the mid-season trade? History. What Alderson has essentially done is adapted the Mets to life under the new CBA ahead of just about every other major league club, while relegating almost a third of the 2014 budget to the “available but untapped” column.

If there is a benefit to having an MLB insider running our team, this is it. The Mets are going to be supremely adapted to life under current MLB operational parameters. You don’t like how the Mets have done business over the past few years? Get used to it, the Player’s Association signed a 5 year deal. Even the Yankees are scaling back and reassessing their approach.

Now I ask you this, what would be better, to adapt to these changes ahead of time (and ahead of other teams) or (like the Nats did in 2011) to take one last shot at using the old paradigm’s flexibility? If you aren’t currently in a position to contend I think the more prudent approach is the former.

Alderson is not a player acquisition guy, he’s not a “baseball” guy … he’s a businessman and a lawyer. His job has been to overhaul the organization, to build a “lattice” if you will, one that will support the systems and operations (the vines) necessary to produce a quality on-field product (the fruit). The grape vine analogy is a good one because it demonstrates how far removed from the players Alderson really is. It’s really Paul DePodesta and J.P. Ricciardi who are in charge of the players — in fact it’s the scouts assembling the aggregate performance data and writing the detailed reports who do the “target acquisition” legwork.

Alderson’s job was to rebuild this lattice, to restructure finances in support of the team’s systems and operations so the team could again make money. That’s it, that’s all he’s had to do. Slash, burn, and redistribute with a focus on the minors. That’s all he did in San Diego and that’s pretty much all he’s doing here. Does that make him a hatchet man? Maybe, if that’s what you want to call it.

Recently Alderson was asked whether his conversation with Johan Santana had “cleared the air,” whereupon he described a more nuts-and-bolts discussion, saying it centered on Santana’s workout plan.

“If that was clearing the air, that was clearing the air, I guess,” Alderson said.

He’s a bitter pill, I’ll admit, but a necessary one nevertheless. Nobody expects veteran players to like him, especially now that he has the legal framework to offset their worth by hugely increasing the value of cheap under control prospects. Do you think he cares that veteran players don’t like him? Do you think he’s worried that free agents might not want to come to NY? Is he acting like it? I don’t think he gives a damn. I think he’s seen the future and investing heavily in pricey veterans isn’t a big part of it. Who is going to win this tussle between veteran interests and Ownership? Baseball is a young man’s game and Alderson is not out to win any popularity contests. That’s not why he’s here. He’s here to fix the Mets structurally.

Whether or not the Mets win now or later really doesn’t matter in this respect. GM’s come and go, some are good and some stink. If DePo and Ricciardi stink and the Mets don’t succeed in the short term, well then hopefully they’ll be replaced by someone better. But the structure, the lattice, remains. If that structure is well-adapted, profitable, self-sustaining, then it will make any GM’s job that much easier. Think of it this way, what GM in his right mind wouldn’t want to run a team with a solid core of young inexpensive players, a vastly improved farm system stocked with a ton of quality pitching, and 40 million in spending money for 2014?

A quality farm promises to remain the primary feeder of major league talent for any successful organization, as such, the importance of its success is not just paramount, it is incalculable. Mitch Petanick in his article yesterday, pointed out how the Mets have some of the finest right-handed pitching prospects in the Minors. Our Florida State League A-ball affiliate (a big performance marker for our current front office strictly in terms of player turnover) last year went to their league championship with by far the best pitching and lowest ERA in their league. There is a wave of pitching heading our way that is larger and more promising than “Gen-K.” Matt Harvey and Zack Wheeler are just the beginning.

Fan support can be fickle, Met fans can be temperamental and impatient, we’ve had so much disappointment it’s hard to see a silver lining even when it’s obvious, but it’s hard not to feel good about the pitching heading our way and the amount of financial flexibility this team is going to enjoy come 2014.

I have a feeling we’re going to look back on Sandy Alderson’s tenure as a huge turning point.

Sure, I’ve seen it before. Most of us probably have. If not at a Yankee game than maybe as Mets fans during a Subway Series game. Yes, I go to Yankees games. I have friends that are Yankees fans and I love hanging out and watching baseball. It’s only fair, since some of them have been to Shea or Citi with me. But when I’ve seen Rivera saves in the past, I regarded it as a common happenstance. The Yankees win, Rivera gets the save. What else is new?

But this time, I’ll pay a little more attention. I’ll save my ticket stub. I might even purchase a program and keep score in that, instead of printing off a bootleg scorecard I created in MS Word that I take to all the games I attend. Because this time, it will be the last time I’ll ever see it.

Saturday morning, Rivera announced his retirement subsequent to the 2013 season. It wasn’t a surprise to anyone, but I guess it was required to make it official. And therefore, I feel I owe it to myself to witness the scene one last time: the clean guitar intro, the E minor-based riff and the jog in from the pen holding his glove in his right hand.

See, the beauty of baseball is that there are no right or wrong answers to any of the subjective questions. Was Willie or Mickey the best position player of all time? How would Babe Ruth have fared in this era? Did Barry Bonds have enough talent to be the best without “help”? Where would a healthy Ken Griffey, Jr. rank? Where does Tom Seaver rank in the pantheon of pitchers? But Rivera ruins the curve. There is a certain right and wrong answer to the question of who the best relief pitcher of all time is. Rivera is the right answer and anyone else is the wrong one.

Besides having the most regular season saves of all time and the plethora of postseason records – of which I won’t waste your time and mine listing – there are two factoids about Rivera that astound me. The first is his career WHIP. Get this: there are three men in the history of major league baseball with a minimum of 1,000 innings pitched to compile a career WHIP under 1.00! Mariano Rivera is second behind Addie Joss of the Cleveland Bronchos/Naps and ahead of Big Ed Walsh of the White Sox. For historical perspective, Addie Joss died in 1911 and Big Ed retired after the 1917 season. Neither of them pitched in the live ball era, let alone the steroid era.

As magnificent as the WHIP is, this next one is truly astounding. There have been more men to walk on the moon (12) then there have been men to score an earned run off Rivera in the postseason (11).

Let that simmer.

And it’s not as if Rivera has only had a handful of opportunities. He leads the universe in playoff appearances and innings pitched for a relief pitcher. His ERA is 0.70 in the postseason.

It’s because of all that I owe it to myself to revel in Rivera’s ubiquitous dominance one last time, and to savor and remember it this time. It’s because I can watch Rivera warm up to Metallica, saw bats in half and cut-fastball his way to baseball royalty. And unlike those who had witnessed Willie and Mickey in their prime, I can say without even a shadow of doubt, I witnessed the best ever.

CHIPPER TO YANKEES: Chop This!

I was very glad to see Chipper Jones reject the Yankees’ overtures for a comeback. It’s not that I wouldn’t want to see Jones have a change of heart, but not with the Yankees … not with anybody else but the Braves.

I’ve always admired players to begin and end it with the same team. That‘s what I want to see for David Wright. It’s one of the things I liked about Cal Ripken, Don Mattingly and Derek Jeter.

It’s rare these days for a player to retire with the same team he began his career with. Unfortunately, it wasn’t that way with Pete Rose, Hank Aaron and Willie Mays.

The Yankees’ stream of injuries prompted WFAN to run a poll of retired players fans wanted to come back with the Yankees. Ripken was on the list. I wonder if it is more a sign of respect or just not being realistic.

Incidentally, Wright is enjoying his time at the WBC, but I can’t but wonder if his time would have been better off had he stayed in Port St. Lucie.

Think of it for a moment, he’s going to be the captain of this team, so it stands to reason his presence would be beneficial to the younger players in camp.

In truth, the question is fair. Last year, nobody saw Oakland coming. The year prior, Arizona caught the league off guard and took the division from the 2010 World champion Giants. The last two years have had fans around the country thinking, “Is this the year the Pirates compete?”

The truth is, baseball is a funny game. The Mets were as exciting of a team to watch as there was in the sport until the All-Star break last year. They ran out of gas, and luck.

Getting to that point is half the battle though isn’t?

I don’t share the same optimism about the predicted result for the Mets in 2013, but I do believe they have enough talent to surprise people. When you’re in a situation like the Mets, the theme of your season centers around the word “if.”

If Wright and Ike can lead the offense and complement each other.

If Harvey and Niese can make a name for themselves in the National League.

If Wheeler can come up and have an impact.

If d’Arnaud can be the backstop we need.

If the outfield surprises us all.

If the bullpen avoids huge let downs.

If the team stays healthy.

In reality, none of those scenarios are impossible or even unlikely at some point. It’s just a matter of whether it all comes together at the same time.

But I’m going to take their optimism a step further. In poker, this would be considered a raise.

I’m optimistic that within 3 years, the New York Mets are the toast of Gotham City. I look at the New York Yankees, and I see a team that is running out of time. You cannot outrun father time. None of us can. When you take a look at their farm system, anybody they are even close to excited about is still years away. They admit this.

Their top prospect, Gary Sanchez just finished A+ ball. Their second best prospect, Tyler Austin got called up to AA at the very end of the season last year.

The core of their dynasty is closing in on taking their final steps on the field, and their first steps toward Monument Park.

What if this is partly by design by the Mets? In 2005 and 2006, there’s no denying that the Mets made an attempt to take back New York City when they opened their checkbooks for guys like Pedro Martinez and Carlos Beltran. It could be argued that they were a tad premature in their attempt because the Yankees were still willing and able to spend on huge free agents such as Sabathia.

The game is changing though. Players like Sabathia, and Tex are not as likely to enter free agency during their prime. More and more, teams are building around their young core and using free agency to complement those players. The Red Sox are trying to do it now, and the Yankees will start to head that way shortly.

Before you call my optimism foolish or blind, answer me this. If (there’s that word again) the Mets core of Harvey, Wheeler, Niese, Wright, Davis, d’Arnaud are as advertised, then 2-3 years from now who do the Yankees have to compete with that? They will likely extend Cano, but after him, what exactly do the Yankees have to make me think the Mets aren’t built to attempt a takeover of New York City in the near future?

A 34 year old Teixeria? An aging Sabathia? An unhealthy Pineda? Who exactly is going to put them over? The truth is, it’s more likely that the Yankees are preparing for a similar roster situation as what the Mets were dealing with over the last few years.

There’s no denying that the Yankees regained control of New York City by developing their young talent and bringing in complimentary veterans. Why can’t the Mets be primed to do the same?

For those that may think this doesn’t matter, I will remind you that some of the greatest moments in this franchise’s history came when the Mets, not the Yankees had the heart of New York.

When I think of this year for the Mets, I will take each day with a grain of salt. Should they surprise me and compete for a playoff spot, I will appreciate the moment. To me, 2013 unlike 2012 and 2011 have a great purpose.

The prior years were about treading water, and finding ways to get rid of contracts. Now, this year is the start of special potentially special. Can Wheeler and Harvey take the necessary steps to become one of the best 1-2 combinations in the NL? Can d’Arnaud being behind the dish not only provide adequate numbers but also help our young pitchers grow? Can Ike Davis and David Wright create a feared 3-4 tandem for years to come?

If those realistic scenarios occur, I believe the Mets could once again take over the hearts of New York and have Yankees fans reminiscing about the way it used to be.

We wont win this season. We wont compete this season. We wont be any good this season. Okay, now that that’s settled, lets go ‘Play Ball’ this season and see what happens. Opening Day is a little over one month away and when that first pitch is thrown, the Mets technically have just as good a chance as anyone to win.

We Mets fans are an interesting bunch Always have been. In 1962 that other team in New York were defending World Champions (again) They had guys named Yogi and Mickey and Whitey and Moose. And they had Roger Maris fresh off breaking what had been deemed the unbreakable record. However, just a few miles away, playing in a dilapidated stadium that was close to being demolished, there was a new team in a town. The Mets countered with guys named Choo Choo, Elio, Marvelous Marv and ‘Hot’ Rod.

And yet, even though the 62 Yankees won 96 games and their eighth World Championship in 13 years, it was the new kids in town who drew more fans.

The difference between the fan bases of our two clubs is simple: Yankees fans feel that anything less than a Championship is simply unacceptable. Mets fans, on the other hand, are ecstatic over finishing .500.

We always hope for the best…but prepare for the worst.

When you think back to 1986, what are the words that come to mind? Swagger. Confidence. Arrogance. Buckner. One word that never really gets brought up is ‘Miracle.’ Sure, Mookie’s slow roller was a gift from the ghosts of Joan Payson and Gil Hodges. But ‘miracle’ is more fitting of 1969 than 1986.

Think back to Game Six. No, not that one. The one against Houston. The Mets were leading the Astros three games to two but we came into the ninth trailing by three and Mike Scott, who’d already shut us down twice in a week and on his way to winning the Cy Young Award, was poised for game seven. Remember that feeling?

Remember that feeling in another Game Six? After Keith flied out, Gary stepped to the plate. The Mets trailed 5-3 in the bottom of the tenth, bases empty and two outs. No hope. Shea was deathly quiet. Failure was written on Davey’s face. The players sat on the bench staring in utter shock and despair at what was playing out before them. Losing was bad enough. Being the team whom the Red Sox would break their curse against was downright embarrassing. But the most heart-wrenching feeling of all was disbelief. Why?

1986 was OUR year. We were supposed to win. We deserved to win. We were entitled. We were the best team. My heavens—We had turned into the Yankees.

And two days later when ‘the dream came true,’ sure, we were elated. But the agony of possible defeat far outweighed the thrill of victory.

In the mid and late 80’s expectations were always high. This was something new for our Metsies. We’re never favored or picked to go far. But with this new burden comes a heavy task. When excellence is expected, almost demanded, anything less is deemed failure. However, when nothing at all is expected and something great happens, it’s that much sweeter.

Over the last quarter century, the two most heartbreaking moments for us came off the bat of catchers: Mike Scioscia and Yadier %$#&^% Molina.

In 1988, the Mets were expected to repeat their ’86 performance. We won 100 games, 10 of those coming in 11 matchups against the Dodgers that season. When Scioscia hit a two-run homer in the top of the ninth in game four against Doc, we were shell-shocked. The Mets never recovered. We were supposed to win. But in the blink of an eye (or the swing of a bat) our expectations and sense of entitlement was crushed.

Same could be said of 2006. That years’ Mets were similar in many ways to the 1986 club. Confident, some arrogance. We dethroned the much hated Braves. Yes, 2006 would definitely be our year. That is until Yadier Molina dug in.

As if 2006 was not heartbreaking enough, the subsequent collapses the next two seasons were downright unfathomable. Choking is hard enough to swallow. But choking when you’re expected to win? That just seems unfair, cruel.

In 1973, the Mets were not good. To say our hitting was anemic would be an understatement. Only one player had over 16 HRs. Only one player hit over 280, Rusty Staub was our RBI leader, plating a whopping 76. No one even had double digits in SB’s. Even our traditionally strong pitching was a letdown. Two of our big three pitchers, Jerry Koosman and Jon Matlack both finished with more losses than wins. And on August 31, our closer Tug McGraw, had an ERA north of 5.00.

But somehow, with no expectations, 1973 remains one of the best years in Mets history. We managed to finagle the NL East title, upset a Big Red Machine team that was filled top to bottom with would-be Hall of Famers. And then, pushed the A’s in the midst of their dynasty, to seven games, even getting the tying run to the plate in the ninth inning of Game Seven.

There are certain players that are held in reverence by their team’s fans. The Red Sox have Ted Williams, the Cubs Ernie Banks, the Royals George Brett. And for us it’s No. 41.

But Tom Seaver was not always Tom Seaver. In the spring of 1969, Seaver was not yet Tom Terrific. He was a promising 24-year old kid with a mediocre 32 wins and 25 losses. (No one expected Seaver to win almost as many games that season as he’d won in the previous two). In Spring Training that March Seaver was joined by Cleon Jones who was a career .272 hitter. (No one dreamed that Cleon would hit .340 in 1969) Former Rookie of the Year Tommie Agee was coming off hitting .217 the previous year. At 26, Agee was considered a has-been.

And if this wasn’t bad enough, our manager was none other than Gil Hodges. Sure, Hodges was loved by New York fans but as a skipper, he achieved little success. With 6 managerial seasons under his belt, the former Brooklyn first baseman had a lackluster .407 winning percentage.

Now, as we inch our way closer to another season, we have little hope. Will Jon Niese turn into another Tom Seaver? No. Will Lucas Duda, like Cleon, hit 340? Of course not. Will Terry Collins join Davey and Gil as championship managers? No way.

But just for the hell of it, lets play out the season and see what happens. In 1962, Casey Stengel told his team, “All I ask is that you bust your hiney on that field.”

Do the Mets have any chance to win it all this season? I think we have about as good a chance as we did in the spring of 1969.

A couple of weeks ago, the great Mets historian and author Matt Silverman, was nice enough to give me a sneak preview into his newest publication, Swinging ’73: Baseball’s Wildest Season. The verdict is in, and Matt has done it again – delivering another Amazin’ Book that should be a part of every Met fan’s library.

This isn’t your regular everyday telling of the “Ya Gotta Believe” season, and in fact it was not what I expected at all. I thought I was going to delve into another narrative of one of my earliest memories of the New York Mets. But instead I was transported through time itself and relived the 1973 season not only from the Mets perspective, but also from that of the Oakland Athletics and the New York Yankees as well. Even more than that, I was swept right into the turbulence of that era, which serves as a fabulous backdrop to the excitement that was happening on the field.

It was fascinating to relive memories that I thought were long forgotten, and to read many of the fabulous quotes from dozens of those who formed the main cast that year. Silverman sucks you right in with his timeless writing style and I know many of you will flip through each chapter in one sitting – which is the true sign of a great story. Yes, 1973 was indeed a wild season. But it was also a transformational season for the Mets franchise, and in it they found the drive and optimism that would define all their future teams as well as their loyal fan base. I encourage all of you to grab a copy for yourselves!

Here is the publisher’s description of the book which describes more about this must-read book:

Interest and attendance were dropping, and football was ascending. Stuck in a rut, baseball was dying. Then Steinbrenner bought the Yankees, a second-division club with wife-swapping pitchers, leaving the House That Ruth Built not with a slam but a simper. He vowed not to interfere—before soon changing his mind.

Across town, Tom Seaver led the Mets’ stellar pitching line-up, and iconic outfielder Willie Mays was preparing to say goodbye. For months, the Mets, under Yogi Berra, couldn’t get it right. Meanwhile, the A’s were breaking a ban on facial hair while maverick owner Charlie Finley was fighting to keep them underpaid.

But beneath the muttonchops and mayhem, lay another world. Elvis commanded a larger audience than the Apollo landings. A Dodge Dart cost $2,800, gas was a quarter per gallon. A fiscal crisis loomed; Vietnam had ended, the vice president resigned, and Watergate had taken over. It was one of the most exciting years in the game’s history, the first with the designated hitter and the last before arbitration and free agency. The two World Series opponents went head-to-head above the baby steps of a dynasty that soon dwarfed both league champions. It was a turbulent time for the country and the game, neither of which would ever be the same again.

I recommend this book to all my readers, and you can pick it up for less than the price of a burger, fries and shake at you know where.

Get your copy of Swinging ’73: Baseball’s Wildest Season right now and at a great low price!

As all Mets fan recall, it didn’t go so well and after 9/11 the Mets could not finish the comeback. I was at the Piazza home run game against Atlanta and I recall being so happy that I was sure they would go on to win the World Series. It never happened. As the Piazza era came to a close with no ring, I felt as though my favorite team was never going to win anything to have a parade over.

That feeling began to change as the 2005 offseason took shape. First Paul Lo Duca then Carlos Delgado. The Mets were well on their way with a mix of youth and veterans. That offseason I purchased a Jose Reyes authentic jersey. He was my favorite player and I spent my work bonus to buy the $200 jersey.

Every year since 1997 my family and I would go to opening day and get together – we were a group of 20 or more! We watched as the Mets spent 2006 beating up everyone and giving Mets fans the kind of run we had been waiting for since 2000. I laid motionless for more than 20 minutes as I watched the Cardinals celebrate on our field that October. (Side Bar: We should have bunted instead of sending Floyd to the plate).

The pain subsided and the Mets came out the gate on fire in 2007. It was such an amazing run until late September. We couldn’t close the deal again, and I can still remember Tom Glavine saying, “I’m not devastated.” Or whatever his exact quote was. I swore on that day, “I will never spend another dollar on an athlete.” I was so angry and he seemed to just get on with his life.

Despite the disappointment, my family and I returned to say goodbye to Shea on opening day in 2008. 2008 was our chance to wipe the slate clean and fix everything. We traded for Johan and we still had a great core. We had rooted so hard for them to take it to the National League. It was setup for another magical run until once again, we were mistaken as the Mets collapsed again. How could this happen again? How could our guys not have it in them to win one more game? To make matters worse, the Phillies won the title. Our group has not returned since.

We all know what it’s been like around here since 2008. No one needs a reminder so I will spare everyone. The point is, I want to come back. I want to be a Mets fan again. I want them to be relevant again. I have given the Mets everything since I was 5 years old and I want to keep going.

My wife asked me what I wanted for Christmas. I asked for a 4 pack of Mets tickets and a David Wright Authentic jersey to replace my Reyes jersey. I want the purchase to symbolize my renewed dedication to the the future of the Mets. It does not need to be this year. Or next. But I need it to become respectable. This is my commitment to Fred, Jeff and Sandy. I am also renewing our family tradition this year to exercise the demons of the last 5 years. Please dont fool me again. Please lead this team to prosperity again.

If not, I won’t be able to stay a Mets fan. It saddens me to say this. But the reality is, I am giving the Mets one more chance over these next few years to return my loyalty. You gave my Reyes jersey one good year and plenty of years filled with disappointment. All that I am asking is to give my Wright jersey more than just one good season. I am dedicated to you, show me the same this offseason and next.

Sincerely,

A Lifelong Mets Fan

This Fan Shot was contributed by MMO reader, Peter. Have something you want to say about the Mets? Share your opinions with over 12 thousand Mets fans who read this site daily. Send your Fan Shot to GetMetsmerized@aol.com. Or ask us about becoming a regular contributor.

Every year they’re fighting for a World Series crown. If they don’t make it, they go out and spend millions of dollars to bring in players who will help the franchise achieve its goal of a championship.

And if it doesn’t work that year, they’ll repeat the process until they get it right.

On this Thanksgiving, I’m thankful for a variety of things including a great family, friends and for the most part my health (I’m currently recovering from a torn Achilles tendon).

But I’m also thankful for the Mets.

It’s always interesting with the Mets. When they have money, they’ll sign Jason Bay, and like now when they don’t have money, they’ll sit back and hope their prospects develop.

Unlike the Evil Empire, that’s the nature of baseball. Teams go through streaks of being great and being bad depending on their finances and how their prospects shape up.

The Mets have been in a down swing since really 2009. Many will say the losing began when Carlos Beltran sat there and watched strike three go by in Game 7 of the NLCS.

But remember, the Mets were a great team for five months in 2007 before the collapse and even played very good baseball in 2008 before another late season swoon.

Despite the losing, I, as well as many of you reading this, have stuck by my team. I’m thankful that the team makes it interesting. That’s why it’s so much fun to follow them.

And that’s why it’s going to be incredible when (hopefully not “if”) the Mets win the World Series. I wasn’t around for 1986, and 2000 was a great run that came up short.

Keep making it interesting, Mets. But if so, lower ticket prices!