Irrational Exuberance

[soupcan]

metirish wrote: Seeing a lot of people wearing Mets gear , in the Bronx where I live it's like they are feeling irrational exuberance

Mets gear is EVERYWHERE!

Its about time.

[dgwphotography]

I've gone from irrational exuberance to stunned disbelief.

[MFS62]

I just exubed.

Later

[Centerfield]

You know what sucks? We get all the way to the World Series and I am not feeling exuberant at all. In fact, I was miserable (like no joke, like actually miserable) throughout all the extra innings.

I should be enjoying this. I think the only way to possibly enjoy this is to be ok with the fact that they might lose this Series. Be ok with the fact that they are set up to be competitive for the next few years, and if it doesn't happen this year, they might be back here next year. Just like the Royals are back from last year.

I just have no idea how to get to that mindset.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Here, drink this!
*hands CF some orange kool-aid*

[Centerfield]

You know, if I were the owner of this team, I would issue a press release today to the fan base. It would be me, in a bathrobe, smoking a cigar surrounded by giant mounds of cash. Giant mounds. Everywhere. More than Breaking Bad. More than Scrooge McDuck.

And the text of my release would say: "It's ok Mets fans. Enjoy the games. And if we don't win it all this year, I got this. So just relax."

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Kind of feel like the Mets need to win it this year, because there's so much uncertainty about next year (especially on the offense). The Mets beat the Nats and the Cubs, but if you asked me to prognosticate, I'd see them more likely playing in the postseason next year ahead of the Mets.

[Centerfield]

Thanks WP. Way to add more pressure to this.

I feel like it's My Cousin Vinny and you just brought up your biological clock.

[Ceetar]

Mets � Willets Point wrote: Kind of feel like the Mets need to win it this year, because there's so much uncertainty about next year (especially on the offense). The Mets beat the Nats and the Cubs, but if you asked me to prognosticate, I'd see them more likely playing in the postseason next year ahead of the Mets.

See, I don't think so. I think the Mets are still better than the Nats, depending on how the offseason goes (Mets still have some offense to figure out, but the Nats have a lot of question marks too). The Cubs are a good shot to be good, but the division is tougher, and other teams, like the Nats or Giants being better hurts the Wild Card chances too.

It's hard to take, but the postseason is tough. I have confidence the Mets will return a few times over the next few years, but even if they're a better team it's not a super high percentage that they never advance this far again. Even if we have a rough week here, we had 7ish months, give or take a few losing streaks, of lots of fun. As hard as it'd be, I'd rather have another 3-4 of those than the Mets win the next four games here and having middling 84 win seasons in 2016-2017

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

I'm still enjoying this and still think the Mets can/will win the World Series, I just can't comfort myself with "we'll be back next year if things go wrong."

[Benjamin Grimm]

Centerfield wrote: I think the only way to possibly enjoy this is to be ok with the fact that they might lose this Series. I just have no idea how to get to that mindset.

I don't know, but here's what works for me:

I'm aware that what the Mets do isn't really important. It doesn't affect my health, my family, my income, none of that. When the Mets lose, I remind myself of their unimportance compared to the things that really matter.

And when they win, I don't do that.

After a tough loss, like last night, or Game 2 of the NLDS, I dismiss the Mets as a frivolity and sleep well.

After an exhilarating win, like NLDS Games 1 and 5, or NLCS Game 4, I don't temper my joy at all, and end up too charged up to fall asleep for several hours.

As I said, this is what works for me. Anyone else's mileage may vary.

[Guest themetfairy]

I'm actually in a very calm frame of mind. I'm still grooving on the fact that we're not watching the Dodgers play. Everything after the Mets eliminated them has been creamy, creamy gravy for me.

And this is a franchise that has never won Game 1 of a World Series. It's way too early to panic.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Mets � Willets Point wrote: I'm still enjoying this and still think the Mets can/will win the World Series, I just can't comfort myself with "we'll be back next year if things go wrong."

Maybe not next year. But the year after? Or the year after?

During those late innings, I'm a wreck. But, like, a supercharged, happy-pacing wreck. In between, enjoying the gift and riding the melt.

[Edgy MD]

I'm exuberant about the present and exuberant about the immediate future.

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

At this point I'd be content just to see the Mets win a World Series game. No one expected them to get this far, so winning at least one game would be an accomplishment.

And I'm not down on the Mets. I don't think they're bad. I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Think I may binge-watch a few episodes of The Leftovers, just so I can watch something less depressing than the last 24 hours.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Mets � Willets Point wrote: I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable.

I don't feel this way. I understand what it means to be down two games to none in a best of seven, and I know that the Mets have been outplayed so far, perhaps badly. But I don't necessarily think this'll automatically carry over to the following games (even though it might). It's just two games. It doesn't wipe out what the Mets, over the past two months or so, have shown they're capable of doing. Momentum is bullshit. Otherwise, the Royals would never lose another game and the Mets would never win another and by now, Cespedes would have already hit 85 homers for the Mets.

[Frayed Knot]

Yeah, it's the old: You're never as good as you look when you're winning and you're never as bad as ... (you know the rest)

[Lefty Specialist]

"Momentum is tomorrow's starting pitcher." -Earl Weaver

Go Thor.

[Centerfield]

Mets � Willets Point wrote: At this point I'd be content just to see the Mets win a World Series game. No one expected them to get this far, so winning at least one game would be an accomplishment. And I'm not down on the Mets. I don't think they're bad. I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable.

I think I am falling in somewhere around here. Trying to organize my thoughts/emotions this morning.

I hate to say it but I think this series is effectively over. I know it's not impossible to come back from 2-0, but it is much, much harder when the other team is just simply better. I am an idiot and will admit to completely underestimating this Kansas City team. No wonder they beat Toronto. They are amazing. It's like facing a lineup of 8 Keith Hernandez, and then a 9th pesky hitter. I think the Mets will win Game 3. Then the Royals will either win the next two, or take it back to KC and win there. But the series will never really be competitive again.

And surprisingly, I think I am ok with this. At least as of now. I would have been furious if the Mets had lost to the Dodgers after that bullshit play. I would have been mad if they lost to a lesser team. But these Royals have beat Harvey, deGrom and Familia. And none of those guys pitched that bad. They just got beat.

If the Mets come back and win, I'll be ecstatic. But if Kansas City wins, I just have to tip my cap and call them my daddy.

It's ok though. We were hoping this would be 1986, maybe it's 1985. Kansas City wins the World Series. We have to wait one more year for the Mets' world domination.

[Guest themetfairy]

Centerfield wrote: And surprisingly, I think I am ok with this. At least as of now. I would have been furious if the Mets had lost to the Dodgers after that bullshit play. I would have been mad if they lost to a lesser team. But these Royals have beat Harvey, deGrom and Familia. And none of those guys pitched that bad. They just got beat.

I'm around here. I have never been so angry after a game as I was after Game 2 of the NLDS. After defeating the Dodgers, everything else has been a beautiful walk in the park.

[Centerfield]

It's crazy. I have never been as angry over a game as I was about Game 2. And I don't remember the last time I relished a victory as much as I did Game 5.

And no matter what happens the rest of the way, I will savor that series victory over the fucking Dodgers all winter long.

[Guest themetfairy]

Centerfield wrote: It's crazy. I have never been as angry over a game as I was about Game 2. And I don't remember the last time I relished a victory as much as I did Game 5. And no matter what happens the rest of the way, I will savor that series victory over the fucking Dodgers all winter long.

CF and tmf similarity score = 100%

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Mets � Willets Point wrote: I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable. I don't feel this way. I understand what it means to be down two games to none in a best of seven, and I know that the Mets have been outplayed so far, perhaps badly. But I don't necessarily think this'll automatically carry over to the following games (even though it might). It's just two games. It doesn't wipe out what the Mets, over the past two months or so, have shown they're capable of doing. Momentum is bullshit. Otherwise, the Royals would never lose another game and the Mets would never win another and by now, Cespedes would have already hit 85 homers for the Mets.

It's not about momentum, it's about a team that is just clearly the best in baseball this season playing at their peak standing between the Mets and a championship. Get an 0-2 count? No matter they'll get a hit. They have a runner on base and two outs? You're not getting out of the inning without first surrendering a hit and RBI. Or two. Or three. Go into the 9th inning with a lead and your lights out pitcher on the mound? Doesn't matter. The Kansas City Royals are going to score and tie the game and eventually win. On the other the side the pitchers have so thoroughly scouted the Mets batters so that Chris Young becomes Greg Maddux. And if a Mets batter makes good contact the defense is there, perfectly positioned to get the ball and make an out. Every. Damn. Time.

The Mets are a great team and they're doing their best. They've just encountered an unstoppable force.

[TransMonk]

The Mets had chances to win Game 1, but flat out got beat during Game 2.

I have had the opportunity to watch over 90% of the Mets games this season and it's been rare (if it happened at all) that one team has done so well against the Mets big pitching guns (Harvey, deGrom and Familia) on consecutive nights.

This KC team is very good. This series isn't over, but I can't say that the Mets are getting cheated.

[Ceetar]

Mets � Willets Point wrote: The Mets are a great team and they're doing their best. They've just encountered an unstoppable force.

i'd love to see some pitch f/x breakdowns on deGrom. I know the Harvey results suggested he had a pretty bad game, stuff wise. Niese and Clippard struck guys out, so it's not like it was just the Royals being the Royals.

I see the Mets pitching as the unstoppable force and the Royals as the unmovable object. The pitchers have just been stoppable. We'll see tomorrow when Thor, who's the hardest throwing of them all, is still unstoppable how bad the Royals look.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Mets � Willets Point wrote: Mets � Willets Point wrote: I just think the Royals are too good. They're practically unbeatable. I don't feel this way. I understand what it means to be down two games to none in a best of seven, and I know that the Mets have been outplayed so far, perhaps badly. But I don't necessarily think this'll automatically carry over to the following games (even though it might). It's just two games. It doesn't wipe out what the Mets, over the past two months or so, have shown they're capable of doing. Momentum is bullshit. Otherwise, the Royals would never lose another game and the Mets would never win another and by now, Cespedes would have already hit 85 homers for the Mets. It's not about momentum, it's about a team that is just clearly the best in baseball this season playing at their peak standing between the Mets and a championship. Get an 0-2 count? No matter they'll get a hit. They have a runner on base and two outs? You're not getting out of the inning without first surrendering a hit and RBI. Or two. Or three. Go into the 9th inning with a lead and your lights out pitcher on the mound? Doesn't matter. The Kansas City Royals are going to score and tie the game and eventually win. On the other the side the pitchers have so thoroughly scouted the Mets batters so that Chris Young becomes Greg Maddux. And if a Mets batter makes good contact the defense is there, perfectly positioned to get the ball and make an out. Every. Damn. Time. The Mets are a great team and they're doing their best. They've just encountered an unstoppable force.

I don't see it that way. The only thing that's real here to me is that the Mets are down 2 games to none in a best of seven and that's enough of a hole to dig out of. But I don't get this Royals invulnerability thing. They lost 67 times during the regular season. They needed 14 innings to beat the Mets by a single run in the opener -- if that isn't essentially a coin flip, then nothing is. They won a coin flip in game one, that's what the Royals won. You might think otherwise because you can micro-analyze game one for hours on end, breaking the game down into innings, into plays, into pitches, into micro-minutiae and thus, coming up with reasons for the Royals one-run victory that you think are sustainable and repeatable and will impact every other game to the Royals advantage in the same way. You wouldn't analyze an actual coin-flip in that fashion, but two good teams matched up in a single game is a coin flip. This whole series is a series of coin flips. So even if the Royals truly are better, this wouldn't bear out in one or five games. And what is better? Does that mean that every Royals pitcher is better than every Mets pitcher? That the worst Royals hurler is better than the best Mets hurler? That all of a sudden, Syndergaard is no longer the hottest, most electric pitcher on either team over the past few weeks? I don't know how the series will end, but I'm pretty sure every other game will be unique and follow its own individual script .

[Edgy MD]

Mets lost by one in Game One in 1986. Lost by six in Game Two. So yeah, that hole is real, that hole is difficult, but it isn't insurmountable.

What's interesting to me IS that Clippard and Niese struck guys out. They're not as programmed to pound the strike zone as Harvey, Wheeler, and Colon. And I'm wondering if Syndergaard can adapt a little to what they're doing.

Maybe this is the kind of team Zack Wheeler would dominate. Is he available?

[Lefty Specialist]

I kind of fall in the same place. I was OK with winning one series, just to prove they belonged. Once Tejada was fed into the Utley wood chipper, I wanted their collective asses kicked. They did that. The total domination of the Cubs was a complete surprise; I was already in gravy mode.

While I want them to win the Series, like Tom Gl@v!ne I won't be devastated if they lose. They already got a lot further than I ever expected them to, even in my most feverish dreams.

At this point I just want to avoid embarrassment on the national stage. Take a game at least and show a little fight, Metsies.

[Centerfield]

If Bartolo is ready, I was thinking give him a start in Game 4 with Matz ready in the pen.