Murray's Not So Magnificent, Either

It's been awhile since we've looked in on our friend Murray Chass...

NOT THE MAGNIFICENT METS
By Murray Chass

I've said this before, but it kills me that Chass has to add a byline to each story he writes on HIS OWN BLOG.

As the mid-point of the season approaches, the Mets do not seem prepared to attain the position they need to avoid a third consecutive late-season collapse.

This is painful. I mean, this is a mess of a sentence. And technically, it's wrong--the Mets are 1 1/2 games behind the Phillies in the NL East. If the Mets stay that way, they'll avoid a late season collapse by never being ahead.

Before the season began, I boldly proclaimed that the Mets could exorcise the Phillies from their shattered psyches forever more if they built an 18-game lead with 17 games to play.

Oh, so this is about your goofy prediction. Except that what you've written isn't much of a prediction, it's merely an obvious statement. If Chass had written "I boldly proclaimed the Mets would be happy if they won the NL East this season," he'd have said the same thing.

And would the Mets "exorcise the Phillies from their shattered psyches forever more" if they had a 25-game lead over the Phillies with 17 to play, or does it have to be an 18-game lead?

The 17-games-to-go juncture, after all, was the point of the schedule the Mets reached the last two years leading the National League East before they did their Phillies fade. They led Philadelphia by 7 games with 17 to go in 2007 and by 3 ½ games with 17 to go last year, and they finished first neither time.

Note the big 'ol [sic] that belongs with "neither."

I'll give Chass the point that blowing the 7-game lead with 17 to play in 2007 qualifies as a collapse, but losing a 3 1/2-game lead in 2008? I'd say that Chass was just using the 17-games to play mark as an arbitrary number to make 2008 identical to 2007, but the Mets' biggest division lead in 2008 was on September 10, with 17 games remaining.

But I will say that losing a 3 1/2 game lead with 17 left is not much of a collapse. The Mets went 7-10 over those final 17 games. Not exactly great baseball, but not a full-scale chokefest. The Phillies went 13-3 over their last 16 games to take the division. I know that media pundits like to focus on the negative and Chass is New York-focused, but I think the more accurate thing to say about 2008 is that the Phillies took the division, rather than the Mets having collapsed.

It seemed to make sense, then, that the Mets would have to take drastic action to avoid a three-peat; building an 18-game lead seemed to be pretty drastic. Right now it’s impossible, too.

Building an 18-game lead is not doing something "drastic;" it's a goal every team has. I mean, who wouldn't want to go 122-40 and eliminate the rest of your division before Labor Day?

And I know Chass is no slave to accuracy, but the Mets trail the Phillies by 1 1/2 games in the NL East with 89 games remaining. I think it's mathematically possible--i.e., the opposite of impossible, as Chass says--for the Mets to build an 18-game lead at some point.

Bruised, battered and broken, the Mets remain in the division race only through the generosity of the Phillies, who may be repaying past favors.

So Chass is suggesting that the Phillies are intentionally losing games?

For example, after losing two of three games to the Phillies 10 days ago, the Mets lost two of three games each to the Yankees and the Orioles and were in danger of falling so far behind that even with more than half the season to go they would have been hard pressed to catch the Phillies.

But the Phillies lost five of six to the Red Sox and the Blue Jays, enabling the Mets to gain a game on them, and the Mets gained yet another game Friday night, slicing their deficit to two games.

Yeah, those Phillies sure are underachieving! How can a team lose five out of six to teams like the Red Sox and Blue Jays? I mean, the Red Sox only have the best record in the American League. And the Blue Jays are well over .500--they'd be in the lead now in 4 out of the 6 MLB divisions.

Perhaps the Phillies aren't winning because the have their own set of problems. Closer Brad Lidge has been on the disabled list. Jimmy Rollins has been in a season-long slump. Even the Phillie Phanatic has been less phanatical. Yes, the Mets are fortunate, but it's not because the Phillies are waiting on them.

The Mets remain in the race despite encountering a multitude of problems, including a season-long siege of injuries, an offense too impotent to put teams away and a bullpen that is vastly improved over last year’s but still capable of relinquishing late-inning leads.

Almost EVERY bullpen is "capable of relinquishing late-inning leads." That sentence says nothing.

Chass then goes on to detail the Mets' injury woes this season. The beginning of the article sets the tone as if the Mets have underachieved all season; Chass then goes on to undermine the tone HE set and shows the very legitimate reasons the Mets have struggled.

Murray, ever hear of story unity?

In the meantime, while the Mets tread water awaiting the return of their injured starters, they need to figure out how to convert late-inning leads into victories. In the space of nine recent days, leading to the weekend, they lost four games which they led after the fifth inning.

After the fifth inning? That's barely half the game! That's like saying the Los Angeles Lakers can't finish because they've lost four games in which they led with 11 minutes remaining in the 3rd quarter.

The Phillies have lost three games in the last 10 days in which they led after the fifth inning. The Dodgers--who have the best record in baseball--lost two such games in the last 10 days. I know that I've only looked at two other teams, but I think it's enough to show that his "statistic" is not very informative. Especially when Murray's next line is this:

The losses resulted from a combination of their relief pitchers giving up runs and their hitters shutting down and not producing late-inning add-on runs.

I suggest that ALL losses for a team result from a combination of its pitchers giving up runs and its hitters not producing. Again, Chass says nothing meaningful in his analysis. This is a recording.

So what did we learn today? That the Phillies are still in first place, but not by much. That the Mets have had a lot of injuries. That the Mets would like to win a division title, which makes them no different than any other team (possible exception: the Washington Nationals). And that Murray Chass doesn't know a lot about baseball.

In other words: absolutely nothing.

Is It Too Soon to Panic? YES!!!!!!!

Wooooohooooooo, it's baseball season! Mrs. Bembledack still wonders why they play 162 games every season, but personally, I love them all. Unlike the NFL where you have a 16 game season, MLB grinds out 162 games in roughly 6 months. Every team is going to have good and bad stretches during a season. The better teams just have more good ones than bad. So why am I getting an AP headline like this one?!?

Panic time for champs? Phillies drop to 0-2

Panic time?!!!!!!!? After two fucking games?!!!!!!!? With 160 games yet to play?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?

Two games in, these Philadelphia Phillies are playing like last year’s team.

Oh, you mean the team that won the World Series last year? Fuck the heck?

Jair Jurrjens and four relievers combined on a six-hitter, Kelly Johnson and Chipper Jones hit solo homers and the Atlanta Braves beat the defending World Series champions 4-0 on Tuesday night.

The Phillies are off to an 0-2 start for the fourth straight year. They’ll receive their 2008 championship rings Wednesday before trying to avoid a three-game sweep.

Alright, so they are off to an 0-2 start. So are you saying that every team should panic when they have a two-game losing streak? And you are saying this is the fourth straight year they have started 0-2? Well, let's look at how they finished the previous three years, shall we?

2008 - Finished 92-70, 1st place NL East and won the World Series. Bravo, good for you.
2007 - Finished 89-73, 1st place NL East, lost in Divisional Series to Colorado 3 games to none.
2006 - Finished 85-77, 2nd place NL East, 3 games out of the Wild Card spot.

Did those teams panic after starting 0-2 in those three seasons? I'm thinking no.

“You always want to get off to a good start, but you can’t repeat until you play 162 games,” losing pitcher Jamie Moyer said.

At least someone seems to have a brain in this article. The author certainly does not.

Jurrjens (1-0) beat a guy twice his age. The 23-year-old right-hander gave up four hits and walked three in 5 2-3 impressive innings.

Is Moyer's or Jurrjens' age really relevant here? Well, maybe. I know it is early and the season and most games north of the Mason-Dixon line are near or below freezing at this point, but it is only one game. Moyer is 46 and probably not thrilled with the cold temperatures right now (that is another story for later).

Jeff Bennett gave up a single to the only batter he faced before Eric O’Flaherty got the next four outs. Rafael Soriano pitched the eighth and Mike Gonzalez finished.

“We had excellent pitching,” Braves manager Bobby Cox said. “J.J. was really good. When he got in trouble, he pitched out of it.”

Moyer (0-1) allowed four runs and eight hits in five innings. The 46-year-old lefty led the Phillies with 16 wins and had a 3.71 ERA last season, earning a $13 million, two-year contract despite his age.

Any team giving a contract to a 40+ year old player is knowingly taking a risk. You are just as likely to have a 6-18 year with a 5.00+ ERA than a 16-win, 3.71 ERA season. I'm more concerned with the lack of offense than a mediocre night by Moyer.

The rest of story details the game. But here is why I don't care for early baseball.

It was 45 degrees when the game started, so fans were bundled in heavy coats, hats, gloves and scarves. Some didn’t show up, even though the game was sold out.
An 0-2 start is definitely nothing to warrant hitting the panic button. The Phillies lost at least two games in a row 19 times last season, including a six game losing streak in June, and still won their division. If you are 5-17 on May 1st, then you might need to look into researching a new team paradigm. The Phillies were 15-13 at the end of April last year and then took off. Two games does not a season make.

--EDIT--

I was reading the sports section of Tuesday's USA Today and noticed the information they had on last night's game. Jamie Moyer was only 3-8 (now 3-9) against the Braves including going 0-0 in 11 IP with a 6.88 ERA last season. So maybe he mojo just doesn't work well against the Braves. Period.

Also, the Phillies got their offense working and came back from seven runs down to beat the Braves 12-11. So I guess there really is no need to panic.