Reassurances Here

[Theoldmole]

Pedro has earned his place in our hearts, and he's an integral part of our championship-to-be team, whether he pitches an inning of the postseason or not.

[MFS62]

Three names come to mind:
Nolan Ryan
Moe Drabowsky
Howard Ehmke

All three had unexpectedly great post season pitching performances.
Drabowsky and Ryan came out of the bullpen and Ehmke (1929) (at the end of his career) was a surprise starter for the Phillies who pitched an 11 (or was it 14?) strikeout victory.

Will John Maine or Aaron Heilman be added to that list?

Later

[Guest Edgy DC]

Aaron Heilman is a good bet to not pitch.

[MFS62]

Edgy DC wrote: Aaron Heilman is a good bet to not pitch.

As a starter?
Or are you saying the Mets will never have a late inning lead to protect?

This is a thread for reassurances.

Later

[HahnSolo]

Success by Heilman would not be unexpected, at least not by me.

[metsmarathon]

wow. humber aside, heilman has the lowest ERA of any metly pitcher in september

[Guest Edgy DC]

...as a starter.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Oh, there's little chance that Heilman starts, unless there are a couple of more injuries.

Even if Pedro's not in the picture, there's still Glavine, Hernandez, Trachsel, and Maine.

Even if Hernandez got injured in Game 1, and couldn't go in Game 5, you'd probably have Oliver start Game 5 (ouch!) or let Glavine go on short rest with the bullpen on alert.

Also, if Pedro's not on the postseason roster at all, you're more likely to get another long guy on the roster, like maybe a Williams or a Bannister.

[Guest cooby]

Maybe four of us ought to pitch

[soupcan]

I've been pitcing batting practice to my son's 4th grade Little League team.

I can get it over the plate pretty good (granted the distance is a bit shorter) and when I need it I can definitely reach back for something extra and whiff these 9 year-olds.

If Willie wants me, I'm there.

[MFS62]

cooby wrote: Maybe four of us ought to pitch

Put me in coach.
I'm ready to play.

Later

[Guest cooby]

All right, we've got two on the staff so far!

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I'm supposed to be reassured by the idea of cooby and MFS62 pitching for the Mets in the NLDS?

It's not working!

[Guest cooby]

No, no no

Soupcan and MFS

[soupcan]

BIG difference!

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Still not working!

[Guest cooby]

Well, then hotshot, how about you volunteering?


(whattya mean BIG difference?)

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I wasn't on the 40-man roster on August 31.

[soupcan]

cooby wrote: (whattya mean BIG difference?)

Means I can strike out little kids and you can't.

[MFS62]

Just to let you know, I throw a spitter.

feel better now?
Later

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

And my daughter can throw a fit.

[Guest cooby]

="soupcan"] ="cooby"](whattya mean BIG difference?) Means I can strike out little kids and you can't.

That is reassuring



Yancy had to remember that antiquated Aug 31 rule

[MFS62]

From Elias Sports Bureau:

] The Mets have lost seven of their last eight games and are 11-15 in September. But don't fret, Mets fans, several teams have struggled in September/October but still won the World Series that year. Here are some examples during the wild card era: 2005 White Sox: 4-10 during one stretch in September, turning a 9�-game lead to 1� 2002 Angels: 5-8 over last 13 games of the season 2001 Diamondbacks: 14-13 in September/October 2000 Yankees: 13-18 in September/October, 2-13 in last 15 games, lost last seven 1997 Marlins: 12-15 in September, 2-7 in last nine games

Ya' Gotta' Believe.
Later

[Guest Rotblatt]

That's more like it, MFS62!

I've been trying (and failing) to draw strength from BP's finding that "hot" teams don't do any better in the postseason than non-hot ones. I just feel like our hitters are so streaky that they need to be raking when the season closes out.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

The offense is too good to suck like this for much longer. They're due to bust out soon.

[Gwreck]

Mets all-time home winning percentage in playoff games: .667

[MFS62]

This probably belongs here more than in the "Sportswriter" thread.

] MET FANS, IT'S NOT AS BAD AS IT SEEMS Mike Vacarro, NY Post September 29, 2006 THERE is something you really should ponder if you are a Mets fan, if your teeth are chattering, if your knees are clattering, if you're convinced - in the time-honored way that Mets fans see the Apocalypse lurking around every corner - that the sky is not only falling, but already fallen. The Mets lost the services of a player named Pedro Martinez last night when it was announced, somberly and sadly, that he will be out 4-6 weeks with a freshly-discovered tear in his left calf (which, before yesterday, was heretofore known as "the healthy calf.") But they didn't lose PEDRO MARTINEZ. Because the truth is, the Mets haven't had the italicized, capitalized version of that player in an awfully long time. The Mets don't lose the 1969 edition of Tom Seaver, or the 1986 version of Dwight Gooden, or even the 2000 versions of Al Leiter and Mike Hampton. Those pitchers were central to everything those Mets teams accomplished. Subtracting them from the Mets two days shy of October would have been like showing up for an evening of "The Producers" a few years back and finding out that Nathan Lane had been replaced for the evening by Dick Butkus. Look, there isn't a Mets fan alive who wouldn't feel better if they had a vintage Pedro Martinez ready to pitch in the playoffs. There isn't a fan of baseball anywhere in this city who wouldn't prefer to see that, in truth, because when he's on, when he's right, that's about as good as New York baseball has been the past couple of years. But we haven't seen that Pedro in a long time, maybe not since his epic scoreless duel with Arizona's Brandon Webb on May 31. We've seen flashes of it. But really, ever since he went back to Boston and was blitzed by his former mates on June 28, flashes is all we've gotten. And flashes is all we would have gotten, if we're being honest with ourselves. And here's the thing to remember: The Mets spent most of this summer without Pedro. And they spent most of the summer winning without Pedro. In many ways, Pedro has been the Mets' placebo over his two years with the team: When he was on the mound, the Mets felt like they were practically unbeatable. But the reality is, their winning percentage since the first day of the 2005 season is over 40 points higher on days when Martinez doesn't pitch than on days that he has. It's true. You can look it up. "I knew he wasn't the regular Pedro," Minaya said yesterday, when he made official what Mets fans and players alike had been secretly fearing for weeks. "He's been battling lower half injuries all year." For most of the season, Pedro's presence, and personality, have been far more valuable, and relevant, than his performance. That won't change now. He'll still be around the team. He'll still be there. And make no mistake: If he were himself, if he were healthy, he would still be the Mets' most significant weapon. But he isn't. And he isn't. And before you start wringing your hands about Pedro not being available in October, you should ask yourself this question: Knowing what you know, seeing what you've seen, would you really feel better if he was?

Later

[Guest cooby]

That last sentence says it all, doesn't it?

[Theoldmole]

Thank you for everything, Pedro. We'll take it from here, and your ring will be waiting for you.

[metirish]

Green...