Picking at nits

I've been in one particular fantasy baseball league for 10 years now. We began it shortly after most of us had graduated from college in 1998, one of my closest high-school friends and other acquaintances of ours, both mutual and from our respective alma maters. For the 2000 season, we renamed the league with the moniker it holds today: The 7 Train League, in honor of the line that takes you to Shea Stadium and the Sports Illustrated article in which John Rocker made it known even to those who had never watched a Mets game.

Each spring, after the Super Bowl, we get the e-mail discussion going to set up our draft date and review the rules and offer any suggestions for changes. There's also a good bit of good-natured smack talk and ribbing that goes on, often between the several Notre Dame and Boston College alumni in the league. We also spread the MLB trash talk around among the Mets, Yankees, Red Sox and Phillies fans among us. This year, I've found myself doing a lot of defending of the Mets' near misses the past two seasons. More specifically, it's been a one-against-eight (the other Mets fan hasn't chimed in to back me) argument that while 2008 was a disappointment and a failure to reach the postseason, it was not a choke job. Yes, 2007 was a choke job and the second-worst collapse in baseball history. (I really feel it was the third-worst collapse. The Mets blew a seven-game lead with 17 to play; in 1964, the Phillies blew a 6 1/2-game lead with 12 to play, and I contend that the Yankees' failure to close out the Red Sox with a 3-0 lead in the ALCS was worse, but that's the postseason, so I'll allow for a conditional designation on that one.)

I will say here that I do realize I am splitting hairs. I know that there are Mets fans as devout as I am who will disagree with me, and I know the argument is strong -- but on both sides. What it comes down to, really, is your definition of "choke." To me, last year wasn't a choke; it was losing out by a game because they didn't have their closer the last six weeks and it threw the entire bullpen out of whack.

While Billy Wagner isn't one of the game's dominant closers anymore, and while he had his faults and shaky innings, his loss was huge. He didn't pitch after Aug. 2 (a rough outing at that), and just one more win anywhere in the last two months would've meant -- at the very least -- tying the Brewers for the Wild Card. That tiebreaker would've been played at Shea Stadium, and while that doesn't mean a Mets win, they wouldn't have had to face CC Sabathia (and the Brewers wouldn't have had to face Johan Santana).

I think it's safe to pinpoint the loss of Wagner as the reason the last game at Shea Stadium came in the regular season and not the postseason (or, at least, a tiebreaker for the Wild Card). The Mets blew 12 saves in the final two months, and while that doesn't account for blown saves in games the Mets then may have come back to win, it also doesn't account for tie games that they lost in the late innings (like the finale), so it's probably a pretty representative sample. And part of the reason Wagner's loss hit so hard was that the relievers the Mets figured could fill in should Wagner go down -- Aaron Heilman, as much as it pains me to say, and Duaner Sanchez -- could not cover for the loss of an All-Star closer. Omar Minaya has accounted for that this offseason, which is why I feel so confident that this year will be different.

I consider it choking when a team blows a big lead, what appears to be an insurmountable lead, a situation where most observers would say the team has it "locked up" -- six runs up in the seventh, a 3-0 lead in a best-of-7 series, seven games up with 17 to play or 6 1/2 with 12 to play. I also see as choking a team that is by far the best in the league as shown over the course of the season (the Cubs and Angels in 2008, division -- at least in the Angels' case -- aside) but bows out of the playoffs without a fight. I also take injuries into account. Had the Mets finished 2008 the same way with Wagner healthy and closing games through the end of the season, then yes, I'd say that they choked. They had a lead of more than one game in early September, and they didn't finish the job. But the team was simply not as good, and no one could have expected them to reach the postseason with the bullpen they had to play with down the stretch. A playoff berth in 2008 would've been a gift, a bonus, considering what was left of the team by the end.

To me, September 2008 for the Mets was a slump, albeit a slump at the worst time. (Conversely, in 2007, the Phillies and the Rockies got hot at the right time, but I don't know too many people who considered either one the best team in the NL for that season.) Individually at the plate, the Mets had a fine September 2008 -- David Wright and Carlos Delgado each hit .340, Carlos Beltran .344, with each hitting at least six homers and driving in at least 19 runs. Jose Reyes (.243, 15 runs, 10 steals) is the only All-Star hitter on the team whom you might say choked down the stretch. That, and the depleted pitching staff. I'm not even getting into the loss of John Maine and the four starts in September that went to Jon Niese and Brandon Knight. To me, the No. 1 hardship for the '08 Mets was Wagner's loss, so I'm not even going to consider alternative explanations. ESPN noted the other night that if games ended after six innings, the Mets would've won the division by 12 games. I cite that only to support my contention that the bullpen was the primary culprit in 2008, the Mets addressed the bullpen as their biggest need this offseason, and 2009 will in fact be different. Along those lines, I also wouldn't consider a lack of depth an instance of choking; that's bad planning, and Minaya has planned much better for 2009.

Additionally, in 2008, the Mets hadn't been leading the NL East the entire season as they had in 2007. It was clear they weren't the best team in the division in '08, let alone the league, but you could make that argument about '07. That's why I don't see 2008 as a choke the way I do 2007.

Look at it however you want, but I've followed this team for 20 years, and seen 97 percent of its games for the past three seasons, and I contend that 2008 was not a choke because, simply, it didn't feel the same as 2007. It didn't hurt as much, because the '08 team wasn't as good as the '07 team. The '08 Mets were lucky to be in contention in September (remember, they needed to win 10 in a row spanning the All-Star break just to get back into it after Willie Randolph was ousted). Plus, I don't see how you can lump the two seasons together when the '07 Mets led or tied for the lead in the NL East for something like 179 out of 180 days (and had the NL's best record for more than half the season), but the '08 team led the division for maybe 30 days. The circumstances were simply not the same.

Since the second half of high school, I've been much more of an essayist than a mathematician. That is, I prefer the more flexible viewpoint rather than the black-and-white, concrete answer. For those taking the hard-line view of "choking" and saying, "The Mets led the division in September. The Mets lost the lead and did not reach the playoffs. Therefore, they choked," does that mean that any team that has a lead but doesn't hold onto it has choked? Did the 2005 Nationals -- leading at the All-Star break -- also choke? Sure, it was a 2.5 game lead with 70-something to play, but all they had to do was play no worse than two games worse than the Braves in the second half and they had the division. Or no worse than five games worse than the Wild Card contenders (since Atlanta led the Wild Card by 4.5 at that All-Star break) to get into the playoffs.

But no one expected the Nationals to be a serious threat in 2005. That lead through the first half of the season was built on an inordinate amount of one-run leads and a bit of emotion charged off the excitement of bringing baseball back to Washington. So no, it wasn't a choke job. And despite the addition of Johan Santana, the 2008 Mets weren't as far ahead of the rest of the division or league as the 2006 team was, or the 2007 team for 25 of 26 weeks. It wasn't the same team, it wasn't in the same position, it wasn't the same circumstances. Hence, I have no qualms about calling 2007 a choke but not 2008.

So that's my argument. I know it has holes, but after an offseason to mull it over, to let it ruminate and give it the perspective of distance, I don't see the 2008 Mets as failing on a season-long expectation or the 2008 Phillies as simply getting hot at the right time (and I think their three-and-out performance in the '07 NLDS supports that theory). The Phillies in '08 were the better team, the more fortunate team, and it was their division to lose. They came close, but they didn't let it happen. I can only hope that the 2009 Mets are as fortunate.

My take on the Carlos Beltran trade

I sat here on the couch last night watching the Astros-Pirates game on my MLB Extra Innings package when the play-by-play man made the announcement:

"The Astros have acquired Carlos Beltran in a two-team deal with the Kansas City Royals."

He said it with all the enthusiasm of announcing the daily lottery numbers. That surprised me. I would've expected more excitement at acquiring the A-Rod of the outfield.

You know, C-Belt.

(And seriously, what is it with the Astros and their "Killer Bs"? Biggio, Bagwell, Berkman, now Beltran? They used to have David Bell in that mix. They traded catching prospect John Buck in the deal, who very well could've become another one. If they were in the American League, they'd probably get Barry Bonds in another year.)

For about an hour, I fretted. I own Octavio Dotel in my primary fantasy league. I kicked myself at not acting on my urge a month ago to try to acquire setup man Brad Lidge, a player I covet not only for his ability, but because he was drafted out of Notre Dame as the Astros' first-round pick in 1998. I searched the rosters, considering possible trades, coming back to some deals I considered proposing weeks ago. Dotel in Kansas City wouldn't have been that bad. He wasn't getting too many save chances with the 37-34 Astros; or at least they were sporadic. I read an analysis earlier in the season that proved that better teams -- winning teams -- do not necessarily get more save opportunities than bad ones. But I just didn't feel as comfortable with Octavio Dotel, Royals closer as I did with Octavio Dotel, Astros closer.

Then, just after Houston GM Gerry Hunsicker left the booth, the announcer came back with the same low-key monotone:

"Octavio Dotel is now an Athletic. The Royals have turned around and traded him to Oakland for third-base prospect Mark Teahen and pitcher Mike Wood."

Whew. Now I feel better. Octavio Dotel, A's closer. That's better. Oakland has done well with closers during their successful run these past few years. There's a winning attitude around that clubhouse, and with a reliable pitcher at the back of the bullpen, they've thrived. Arthur Rhodes is not a reliable pitcher at the back of the bullpen, that's been their problem this year. The only problem I could foresee is that Oakland no longer has pitching coach Rick Peterson -- he's in New York now, helping the Mets to the best ERA in the majors.

But as for the Astros, they made out well in this deal. They gave up one young closer who has struggled just a bit this year, but certainly looks like he's on his way to being a reliable stopper. They traded a catching prospect who likely would've replaced Brad Ausmus next year, but he's not a sure thing. And they got a five-tool player, even if it's only for three months. In dealing Richard Hidalgo for David Weathers last week, Houston got itself another reliable setup man who can step into the seventh/eighth inning role vacated by Lidge now that he's coming on in the ninth.

What makes it such a great move for the Astros is perhaps more than any team outside Boston, they're built to win Now. You hear that a lot, but no where is it more true than Minute Maid Park. Bagwell and Biggio are not getting any younger, faster or healthier. Who knows if Robot Roger Clemens will return next season -- or if he'll have the same amazing success? Their pitching staff, outside Clemens and Weathers, is on the young side, and when Clemens does retire, Andy Pettitte can assume the experienced veteran leader role. Taylor Buchholz, acquired in the Billy Wagner trade, could very well become a No. 3/4 starter someday. But the bulk of the offense is aging, and replacing Bagwell, Biggio, Ausmus and Jeff Kent will be the more pressing needs in the coming seasons.

If Houston is going to win its first playoff series -- ever -- it will need to make a run with this team.

On fantasy trades and no-hitters

The Late Show's Top Ten Cool Things About Pitching A Perfect Game

As read by Randy Johnson on May 19, 2004:

10. "After this, I can go 0-15 for the year and honestly not give a crap."
9. "My pre-game dinner at Denny's tonight? On the house!"
8. "Shows everyone that even though I'm 40, I can still ... I'm sorry, I lost my train of thought."
7. "Cool to get congratulatory call from the President, even though he kept calling me "Larry."
6. "Can walk up to guys who've thrown no-hitters and whisper, 'Loser.'"
5. "All the pine tar I can eat!"
4. "Your catcher hugs you and it feels kinda ... nice"
3. "Maybe people will finally forget about the time I killed that bird."
2. "It's just one more thing about me that's perfect, am I right, ladies?"
1. "George Steinbrenner just offered me a billion dollars to sign with the Yankees."

Maybe two weeks before Randy Johnson's perfect game last week, a Red Sox fan in my fantasy league e-mailed to see if I'd trade him Curt Schilling for Johnson. He was wary of making the "homer" trade, thinking Johnson could be slightly better than Schilling this year. I thought otherwise, and turned it down.

Then Johnson went out and lost 1-0 to the Mets, pitching a great game. He followed that up with perfection.

My thinking was this: Schilling and Johnson can have very similar numbers on the same team, but now Schilling is on a better team. I figured his numbers had the potential to be better. Besides, Schilling's injury last year wasn't a common pitching injury -- he broke some bones in his hand on a hard hit up the middle. It wasn't a shoulder or elbow injury, no rotator cuff or ligament damage. If anything, it allowed him to rest his arm and throw less innings last year. Johnson's injury was different: It was his knee, and some reports say it's still suspect, that as long as the pain remains minor, or as long as he can pitch through it, he'll go on. But when that pain threshold gets too high, he's in trouble. Our league also doesn't have DL slots, a decision I abhor and a fight I've not been able to win with the majority of our 10 members voting against it. Without any DL slots and with our lineup settings, any injured players have to become part of our five-man bench. So if you have four injured hitters and two of your bench spots are taken up by pitchers, then you've got to cut somebody just to get another hitter to put into your lineup. So I couldn't take the chance that I'd be trading my No. 1 pitcher (and one of my three keepers from last year) for a very similar pitcher on a weaker team who, if he went down, would leave me without a No. 1 starter. Yes, if Schilling goes down, I have the same problem, but at least that's one that didn't have the warning signs of a potential Johnson injury.

* * *

As some writers and announcers are fond of saying, for the 6,706th time since the team's inception in 1962, a Mets pitcher failed to throw a no-hitter. Tom Glavine came close yesterday, taking a perfect game into the seventh inning and giving up the only hit in his 4-0 complete-game win with two outs in the eighth.

Four outs away. Again.

And, for the record, I was offered Glavine in a trade in the same fantasy league about a month ago. Turned that one down too. Decided to keep Juan Pierre.

I've watched so many Mets games get past the fifth with a 0 in the hits column for the opposing team. I once remained in the same horizontal position on the couch one night as David Cone mowed down the Phillies or the Braves or whoever it was in the late 80s that he nearly no-hit. I didn't move until he gave up that first hit, and by then I really had to go to the bathroom. I've seen two minor-league no-hitters in person, but I've yet to watch one in the majors even on TV -- most likely owing to the fact that the Mets are usually the only games I watch from the beginning and, well, you know. I was at the ballpark on September 2, 1990, when Dave Steib threw one for the Blue Jays, but that was in Cleveland and I was at Shea.

Maybe I'll see one tomorrow night. I'll be at Shea when Steve Trachsel, who threw one of the Mets' two one-hitters in three games last year, faces the Phillies. It's my fourth Mets game this season ... and my fourth Steve Trachsel start this season. He's quickly become the pitcher I've seen throw the most innings in person in my lifetime. Last offseason, I discovered Retrosheet and began the process of cataloging ever major league game I've attended. I remembered many of them offhand, not by date, but by pitcher, home run, event, etc. I remembered Lenny Dykstra's inside-the-park home run for the Phillies against the Mets, and found the date of July 24, 1990, in a Phillies media guide I have. I recalled Joe McEwing and Mike Piazza homering off Randy Johnson on a Sunday afternoon at Shea in 2000, so I browsed for that box score. I consulted friends and family who attended certain games for their recollections, and I dug out old scrapbooks for ticket stubs. I'm certain I got every one, which is now up to 85 games since my first one in August 1983, and I would also count the 1989 Mets-Yankees exhibition game at Shea at the end of spring training, since it was two major league teams in a major-league park close enough to the regular season, but I can't find a box score. Because I can't remember exactly when I got to the park, or if we left early, or when I was in the bathroom and missed an at bat or four, I used artistic license to just count all stats from every game for which I had a ticket. If I was in the ballpark for an inning, I was in the ballpark for five innings, and the stats count.

So Trachsel leads in individual innings pitched, and Mike Piazza has both games played (24) and at bats (91). I've yet to scour the data for leaders in all the other categories, but I do know this:

• I've been to 16 ballparks, including the now-retired (and, in some cases, razed) Memorial Stadium in Baltimore, Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia, County Stadium in Milwaukee and Tiger Stadium in Detroit.

• The Mets are 21-22 in the 43 games I've seen them play. The Yankees are second with 22 (14-8), the Phillies third with 11 (4-7). The Braves and Pirates, with nine each, lead the teams more than a two-hour drive from the Jersey Shore.

• I've seen all 30 teams play at least once.

• At 3-0, the Royals are the only team undefeated in more than one game I've attended.

• The Dodgers are the opposite at 0-3.

• The Brewers are 2-0 as a National League team (a win each at County Stadium and Wrigley Field), 0-1 as an American League team (at Yankee Stadium).

• After attending one game in 1983 (Yankees 2, Angels 1, August 21) and two in 1985 (the Mets split at Shea, losing to Cincinnati and beating Chicago), I've seen at least one game every year since 1988.

• The 12 games I attended in 2000 are the most in one season, followed by 1990's 10.

• July's 21 games is tops by month, followed by June's 16 and September's 15.

• I've seen four October games, two of them postseason (the Mets' Game 1 NLCS loss in Atlanta in 1999 and their Game 5 NLCS clinching victory over St. Louis to send them to the 2000 Subway Series).

Tomorrow we'll see if the Mets can break .500 for 2004 and reach .500 for my career, and if

Trachsel can improve upon his 2.48 ERA, his 1.20 WHIP and his 2-2 record in 40 innings over six starts.

And just maybe a no-hitter.