Irrational Exuberance

[Lefty Specialist]

"Whatever Duuuuda wants......Duuuuuda gets........."

[RealityChuck]

As I mentioned elsewhere (and it's still true), there has only been one day since July 31 where the Nationals gained ground on the Mets.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Actually, there have been three since August 3: Return of the NHOP

[dgwphotography]

Mets � Willets Point wrote: Some advice for Blue Jays fans that works for Mets fans as well.

That was a good read.

There�s no greater feeling than being a fan of a baseball team that just got good, and you never know when the wins will either stop coming or become routine.

This is exactly why the summer of 1985 was more fun than the summer of 1986.

[Benjamin Grimm]

There was also more suspense in 1985 than in 1986, when the Mets ran away with the division. In 1986, all of the suspense of 1985 was compressed into the month of October, which was, and will always remain, the greatest baseball month of my life.

[Frayed Knot]

This is exactly why the summer of 1985 was more fun than the summer of 1986.

And why '84 might have been better still.
Among my Met fan friends of the '86 era, if you wanted to talk Mets but weren't well-versed on the '84 team we automatically dismissed you as a bandwagon jumper.

[dinosaur jesus]

1984 was the most fun. 1985 was the most exciting. The last series with St. Louis in 1985 was incredible.

[Benjamin Grimm]

1984 had its own kind of magic, but by late July or early August I had a sense that it wasn't going to happen for the Mets. The excitement in 1985 went all the way to the end of the season, and I hadn't experienced anything like that since 1973, when I was only ten and too young to appreciate it.

1999 had a similar exciting ending, and one that ended better. If I was born 10 or 15 years later than I was, I think 1999 would be my favorite season. But I was older and more jaded by then, so for me it's 1985.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I was an 84 man myself. Still hate Rick Sutcliffe too.

Lots of 1985 & 1999 parallels.

[nymr83]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: 1984 had its own kind of magic, but by late July or early August I had a sense that it wasn't going to happen for the Mets. The excitement in 1985 went all the way to the end of the season, and I hadn't experienced anything like that since 1973, when I was only ten and too young to appreciate it. 1999 had a similar exciting ending, and one that ended better. If I was born 10 or 15 years later than I was, I think 1999 would be my favorite season. But I was older and more jaded by then, so for me it's 1985.

Yeah, born in 83 my favorite years are 98-99, 2000 sucked so bad the way it ended that I'd rather watch Kenny Rogers Fuck us over again.

[batmagadanleadoff]

This might be the most remarkable month in franchise history. About four weeks ago, the Mets were as lifeless and moribund as its ever been in the Citi Field era -- and had just added another fiasco to its long list of lolmets stuff. Today, we're planning the post-season rotation. And it's still not even September.

And screw those Baseball Prospectus odds. If the Mets win the division, they have as good a chance as anybody to take home the crown, barring injuries.

[Guest cooby]

'73 for me. Never ever forget it. I'd go back to that year without a qualm. Loved it; every minute of that summer.

[Guest d'Kong76]

KB just told me not to get cocky, and said there's
a whole month of September left.

(I wasn't being cocky, just said the Mets were wining again)

[ashie62]

I got chewed out by my mailman for mentioning the Mets magic number.

[Guest cooby]

After thinking about this a while I remembered that I absolutely adored the 2000 team too. I hope this the right thread

[Zvon]

cooby wrote: '73 for me. Never ever forget it. I'd go back to that year without a qualm. Loved it; every minute of that summer.

Anyone weened in '73 has gone through their baseball life knowing full well that anything is possible in baseball.

[Farmer Ted]

Not going to lie. Skipped over a curb today.

[Lefty Specialist]

I rarely dance on the furniture. But I did last night.

[TransMonk]

I clapped so hard that my hands still stung an hour later.

[Centerfield]

The cool thing is that this thread is more than a month old, and we are even more exuberant than when it started.

Hopefully we'll be saying the same thing a month from now.

(and maybe even one more after that)

[Ceetar]

Centerfield wrote: The cool thing is that this thread is more than a month old, and we are even more exuberant than when it started. Hopefully we'll be saying the same thing a month from now. (and maybe even one more after that)

But it's more and more rational.

[Benjamin Grimm]

And the exuberance is more and more rational with each week that passes.

(EDIT: Oops... Ceetar's reply snuck in just ahead of mine.)

[Centerfield]

For the record, when this thread started the Mets were 58-50. 2 games in front of the Washington Nationals (55-51).

[Benjamin Grimm]

Actually, on the morning of August 5, when this thread started, the Mets were 57-50, the lead was 1 game, the magic number was 56, and the NHOP was .500.

Things have only brightened since then.

[Centerfield]

Wow, that really was irrational.

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

It was due to the Mets gained solo possession of first place following a sweep of the Nats and the trade deadline.

[Centerfield]

This game is crazy. You battle all year long, then in one series, you have such huge swings. If Storen retires Cespedes Tuesday and Wednesday, the lead could easily be 3 games. Instead it's 7. What a crazy game.

It occurred to me yesterday that the Mets have never won a closely fought division race in my lifetime. In 2006, it was a run away. In '88 they won by 15 games. In '86 they won by 1000 games. That's it. 1973 was 2 years before I was born.

Even the wild card in 2000 wasn't close. The only close race they've won during my life was in 1999, and that was the wild card.

Maybe at the end of the day, this will be considered a run away, but for the first time, I might see a Mets team win a tight division.

[Ceetar]

Centerfield wrote: It occurred to me yesterday that the Mets have never won a closely fought division race in my lifetime. In 2006, it was a run away. In '88 they won by 15 games. In '86 they won by 1000 games. That's it. 1973 was 2 years before I was born. Even the wild card in 2000 wasn't close. The only close race they've won during my life was in 1999, and that was the wild card. Maybe at the end of the day, this will be considered a run away, but for the first time, I might see a Mets team win a tight division.

yeah. 1999 was it. At the time the Wild Card was fine, not a one and done.

We've seen them _lose_ tight races. Same feeling without the joy at the end I suspect.

This is mostly a runaway. At least in the sense that they've never really gotten to the point where dropping any one game is more than a 'oops, would've liked to have that'. Maybe that stupid Upton game, but that was too early.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

Centerfield wrote: ...1973 was 2 years before I was born.

Ouch, that hurt.

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Rockin' Doc wrote: Centerfield wrote: ...1973 was 2 years before I was born. Ouch, that hurt.

I was in-utero for the 1973 season, myself.