Can-Do Attitude

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Great. And as great as they're playing, the Royals almost certainly won't make the playoffs this year, either.

Tonight's win was nice. They're proving a little more resilient in stretches with a full, healthy lineup. But they can-do little beyond that, given how much water the good ship Starting Pitching is taking on. Let's go down with a fight, but also without illusions-- this is NOT happening.

REVERSE JINX!

[Fman99]

I guarantee they win more games.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: 25-13 seems like a tall order for this team.

I think 24-13 is much more within reach.

It could hardly have been a better night. Not only did the Mets win and the Cardinals (relatedly) lose, but Nats lost, the Marlins lost, and the Giants lost. The only ones who didn't cooperate were the Bucs, who beat up on the heartless Astros.

[Frayed Knot]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Great. And as great as they're playing, the Royals almost certainly won't make the playoffs this year, either.

But, again, KC started so much further back, so far back that this 9-straight/13-of-16 run of theirs was needed just to bring them up to where we are now coming off a 6-8 stretch over the past two weeks.
Put another way, the Royals need to essentially duplicate what they've just done over the last few weeks to really jump into the thick of the race, we just need to do it once (and not shit the bed during the 'non-streak' games).

Tough, but possible.

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, put on your YGB shirt and SHUT UP!!11!

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: Centerfield wrote: 25-13 seems like a tall order for this team. I think 24-13 is much more within reach. It could hardly have been a better night. Not only did the Mets win and the Cardinals (relatedly) lose, but Nats lost, the Marlins lost, and the Giants lost. The only ones who didn't cooperate were the Bucs, who beat up on the heartless Astros.

the Mets have made it tough, but it's worth keeping an eye on those Nats. plenty of baseball left, including 6 head to head.

31 other games in which the Mets need to be 4 games better than them if they sweep them. Can they go say 20-11 while the Nats go 16-15? It's not the most absurd thing.

Just keep winning.

[Centerfield]

Frayed Knot wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Great. And as great as they're playing, the Royals almost certainly won't make the playoffs this year, either. But, again, KC started so much further back, so far back that this 9-straight/13-of-16 run of theirs was needed just to bring them up to where we are now coming off a 6-8 stretch over the past two weeks. Put another way, the Royals need to essentially duplicate what they've just done over the last few weeks to really jump into the thick of the race, we just need to do it once (and not shit the bed during the 'non-streak' games). Tough, but possible.

Gotta at least split these last two. And if by chance somehow they sweep the Cards...

[Centerfield]

(Btw, one need look no further than this thread to remember that the word "fan" derives from "fanatic". Wow, we are all fucking nuts.)

[Zvon]

I was down on the Mets but U guyz picked me up. Now we pick them up. We gotta.



A few 2007 CPF avatars in that.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Mets Depleted, Not Yet Defeated | Bob Nightengale, USA TODAY Sports

[Centerfield]

3.5 games out. 3 games against the Phils coming up. Sure, there are still a few teams to leap over, but stranger things have happened.

More importantly, they've finally started hitting a bit. Probably get Bruce and Walker back tonight. If they call up Conforto, we can run this out there:

1. Reyes 3B
2. Walker 2B
3. Cespedes LF
4. Bruce RF
5. Conforto CF
6. Loney 1B
7. Cabrera SS
8. d'Arnaud C

That's good enough to get it done. You can also move Bruce to 1B and run a Ruggiano/de Aza platoon. Flores is your super-sub. KJohnson is your LH bat, TJ Rivera comes from the right side.

Let's win 20 in a row.

[Guest d'Kong76]

This series has gone as planned, but finishing off the Fish tonight with a four-
game sweep feels paramount to me. I wanna see Bill tonight!

[Frayed Knot]

7-2 since I laid down the 25-13 mark as the needed mark for securing a probable WC#2.
So now it's more like a still tough but easier to swallow 18-11 goal. And we've only lost two major players to injury during that time which is, like, below average for this season.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Frayed Knot wrote: 7-2 since I laid down the 25-13 mark as the needed mark for securing a probable WC#2. So now it's more like a still tough but easier to swallow 18-11 goal. And we've only lost two major players to injury during that time which is, like, below average for this season.

3-1 since I laid down the 21-12 Gauntlet, so I'm also at 18-11

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'd be calculating the NHOP but it's a lot more complicated this year than last.

[TransMonk]

*I was originally going to put this in the "Walker's Back" thread, but...

I've often remembered 2009 as being a year where I thought injuries really impacted the team's ability to compete. 2011 was a high injury year as well, but I'm not sure expectations were as high.

I know there are "official" team-by-team charts of time missed and payroll lost that actually gauges the impact of injuries to a team, but to my eyeballs, I have to believe that 2015 is becoming arguably the most injury impacted year in recent memory. I pulled these 2009 and 2011 stats of the interwebs, but the 2016 numbers are mine.

2009
Jose Reyes: Out 5/22-end of season
Carlos Delgado: Out 5/11-end of season
Carlos Beltran: Out 6/22-9/6
Angel Pagan: Out beginning of season-5/15, 6/1-7/9
Johan Santana: Out 8/21-end of season
Tim Redding: Out beginning of season to 5/17
John Maine: Out 6/7-9/12
Oliver Perez: Out 5/3-7/7, 8/24-end of season

2011
Jose Reyes: Out 7/3-7/18, 8/9-8/29
David Wright: Out 5/16-7/21
Angel Pagan: Out 4/22-5/26
Daniel Murphy: Out 8/8-end of season
Ike Davis: Out 5/12-end of season
Jason Bay: Out beginning of season-4/20
Johan Santana: Out entire season
Chris Young: Out 5/2-end of season
Jonathon Niese: Out 8/24-end of season

2016
Zach Wheeler: Out entire season
Josh Edgin: Out beginning of season-8/3
Travis d'Arnaud: Out 4/26-6/20
Lucas Duda: Out 5/21-end of season
David Wright: Out 5/28-end of season
Juan Lagares: Out 6/15-7/1, 7/29-end of season
Jim Henderson: Out 6/19-8/22
Matt Harvey: Out 7/4-end of season
Jonathon Niese: Out 8/23-end of season
Neil Walker: Out 8/28-end of season

Also in 2016: short DL stints for Flores, Reyes, Cabrera and Cespedes...Cabrera and Cespedes with lingering injuries for weeks (if not months).

Honestly, when you add in the steps back that Conforto took at a ML level and the decline of last year's offensive MVP Granderson, I'm pretty darn proud that the Mets still have a legitimate shot at the Wild Card.

[Frayed Knot]

Nice time to re-visit this thread. Pages 2 and 3 in particular are a hoot to go over as our alternating optimism & pessimism (sometimes both at the same time) is all over the place.

Anyway, they're now 18-7 since I called for them to close out the season 25-13, meaning that merely 7-6 from here on out could do the trick.
And although I'd hate to bank on 7-6 doing the trick, that mediocre record would still be enough to force the Giants to go 8-5 (remember also that they're the worst tam in the NL AND have six of their final 13 vs LAD) AND force the Cards to go 9-4, and those records would merely cause a tie for the two WC slots, a play-in for the play-in as it were.

An 8-5 run by the Mets would force SF to go at least 9-4 and the Cards 10-3;
9-4 forces 10-3 combined with 11-2, and so on. And to lose the WC outright tack an extra win onto each of the other teams' needed records.



Giants remaining:
@ LAD x 3
@ SDP x 4
vs COL x 3
vs LAD x 3

Cards remaining:
@ COL x 3
@ CHC x 3
vs CIN x 4
vs PIT x 3

[Fman99]

Fman99 wrote: I guarantee they win more games.

I totally called this by the way. It's a gift.

[Frayed Knot]

An 8-5 run by the Mets would force SF to go at least 9-4 and the Cards 10-3; 9-4 forces 10-3 combined with 11-2, and so on. And to lose the WC outright tack an extra win onto each of the other teams' needed records.

And one more thing ... if the Giants should suddenly and stunningly reverse their second half trend and go on a streak which would force the Mets to play keep-up and catch-up, then that run is almost certainly going to come at the partial expense of the Dodgers* who sit only 4 games ahead of the Mets at this point. IOW, we're guaranteed at least six losses combined from the teams directly ahead and behind us.


Dodger sked:
vs SFG x 3
vs COL x 4
@ SDP x 3
@ SFG x 3




* Dodgers lost a wild one today, down 6-0 early and 7-1 after 5, they stormed back to go Up 9-7 before the DBacks scored 2 in the 8th to tie it then won it in the 12th

[Lefty Specialist]

I must admit I was pessimistic. Losing 5 of 6 to the D-Backs made me throw in the towel. But now I see the ref wasn't looking so I surreptitiously grabbed the towel back.

Their 1-game lead over the Giants is essentially a 2-game lead as the Mets have the tiebreaker. I'm torn because I don't want to see them face [u:38ojoz62]either[/u:38ojoz62] the Cards or the Giants in a one-game winner-take-all.

[Frayed Knot]

Lefty Specialist wrote: Their 1-game lead over the Giants is essentially a 2-game lead as the Mets have the tiebreaker.

For positioning purposes among WC #1 and WC #2, yes. But those tie-breakers won't help when determining who's in or out so we'd really like to finish at least a game clear of either SF or StL (and preferably both) because the only thing worse than having to survive a play-in game is having to survive two play-in games.
Imagine being told at the beginning of the year that, yes, this pitching-rich Mets team would make it at least as far as the first full round of the playoffs but that they'd open that round with Seth Lugo and Robert Gsellman as their Game 1 & 2 starters. That's a very likely scenario of the Mets surviving a double play-in situation and using Thor & Bart to get through them.

I'm torn because I don't want to see them face either the Cards or the Giants in a one-game winner-take-all.

Well then as long as we're being optimistic these days, only 8 games behind Washington with 13 to play. What's that Lottery slogan? 'Hey, you never know'.

[Centerfield]

Slightly more realistic is the possibility that the Mets could win the first slot, then the Cards and Giants could tie for the second. Which would mean they would have to play a play in game to get to the play in game.

And it would be great if that game was a 24 inning injury-riddled bean brawl with both teams burning their 1 and 2 pitchers.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Would be just like the Braves to come in and take 2-3 or sweep and
ruin this several-week high we've been on.

[Frayed Knot]

They just took 2 of 3 from the Nats over the weekend so it wouldn't be unprecedented.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I know, just being gloomy!

[Zvon]

d'Kong76 wrote: I know, just being gloomy!

I think this is going to be a few weeks of mood swings for us all. May the last swing be up.

[Lefty Specialist]

I hate living and dying with every win and loss.

However, it's better than NOT living and dying with every win and loss.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Lefty Specialist wrote: I hate living and dying with every win and loss. However, it's better than NOT living and dying with every win and loss.

I wish someone besides a Wilpon coined the phrase I'm not even going to say.
But yes, I agree with the NOT notion.

[Guest d'Kong76]

d'Kong76 wrote: Would be just like the Braves to come in and take 2-3 or sweep and ruin this several-week high we've been on.

Fuck you d'Kong and your dumb pic is gone tomorrow.

[Centerfield]

The Dodgers are up 4-1 on the Giants and still threatening.

And thank god we don't have to face the Braves anymore.