Precedent Not So Kind

[G-Fafif]

Did a little research, presented in full here[/url:1tyh812d], that tells us plausibly contending Mets teams (those you can reason still have a shot) that compile losing first-half records (hence their shot doesn't strike you as all that great) don't generally surge in the second half. Not that you couldn't have guessed that, I suppose.

The baseline for any chance of a playoff berth is 35 wins in the first 81 games, as derived from the 1973 Mets' record of 35-46. Their success, you also could have guessed, is incredibly anomalous in Mets history. Fifteen teams have completed the statistical first half with a losing record that was no more than net six games from a winning record -- anywhere from 35-46 to 40-41. The 2009 Mets are the 15th such team in that position. Only the 1973 Mets have converted such a start to a fantastic finish (and, as we know, they had lots of help from a squishy division). Beyond them, only the 2008 and 2001 Mets became and remained a viable contender deep into their respective seasons before falling short. What blows my mind is the '73 Mets' record after 81 games was the same as decided noncontenders from 1966 and 2003 -- and worse than 1968's team (which was only game off our current pace).

A winning record at the halfway mark isn't a guarantee of anything. Six Mets playoff teams had won at least 45 of their first 81 games, but a record of at least 41-40 (going as high as 48-33 in 1990) wasn't good enough for 15 other Mets teams to take to the house, though some came enjoyably, perhaps unnervingly close to making the postseason.

Only two Mets teams with winning records after 81 games didn't finish with more wins than losses: 1991 and 2004. The only Mets team to finish with more wins than losses after a halfway mark below .500? 2008, 2005, 2001 and 1973.

2009, you've been warned.