game 2 lineupWhen you follow the Mets, you get used to wearing a little mud. The MSM, starving for newspaper sales, website clicks and a call-in audience will pounce on any perceived misstep and blow it up into something unrecognizable. And let’s face it, ever since Carlos Beltran didn’t offer at a wicked Adam Wainwright curveball nine years ago, the Mets have been an easy target and much of it has been warranted: two historic late-season collapses, a new stadium full of forced charm and devoid of any genuine identity, a financial scandal that would make Willie Sutton proud and a commensurate stripping of the major league product so stark as to make one hesitate to use the term. With all that comes some ancillary foolishness upon which local media is all too ready to pounce. Never mind shirtless Tony Bernazard or Francisco Rodriguez sucker-punching his elderly father-in-law. Again, you would expect the MSM to detonate that kind of dynamite. No. We’re talking about outrageous, full-on National Enquirer style stuff. I can recall a 2009 article in the New York Post gleefully pointing out that a recently apprehended serial killer was a Mets fan – the proof being that an orange and blue cap was found in his apartment. There was also the story of Kirk Radomsky, employed as a Mets’ clubhouse man who happened to have a side gig as a PED distributor. The latest tempest isn’t even that meaty.

When the Opening Day lineup was announced a couple of days ago, there was a bit of head-scratching among the fan base. David Wright batting second? Daniel Murphy in the five-hole and Juan Lagares relegated to number seven? This looked nothing like Terry Collins’ usual by-the-book look of your base-stealer leading off, your best hitter up third, and so on. Aha! the media smugly proclaimed. This must mean that GM Sandy Alderson bypassed Collins’ prerogative to make up the lineup card and ordered his own be used. The audacity! It simply isn’t done that way. Would Billy Martin have stood for such nonsense? Would Gil Hodges ever knuckle under like that? Never. How dare Alderson have such chutzpah?

Over here, the question becomes “Who cares?” Lineups are a fluid thing and the only time it ever matters is in the first inning. You’ll notice that with this “crazy” lineup, the Mets accomplished something they couldn’t do all last year, with a “traditional” batting order: take a series from the Nationals. Yes, it certainly helped to have Bartolo Colon, Jacob deGrom and Matt Harvey throwing for you, but what’s missed amid all the terrific pitching and Harvey’s glorious return is that the Mets came pretty close to doubling up the Nats when it came to plating runs. In three games, the Mets scored ten and Washington scored six – and that’s with both deGrom and Harvey unable to help things along by successfully dropping down a bunt. Do I love the pitcher hitting eighth, as deGrom did last night? Not even a little bit, but in the grand scheme of one-sixty-two, it’s pretty small potatoes and it will only get noticed if it starts costing the team games.

Meanwhile, they gotta keep those clicks coming, don’t they?

Follow me on Twitter @CharlieHangley.

11 comments on “The Mets’ Lineup “Controversy”

  • Joe Vasile

    I don’t really care who puts together the lineup, as long as it is one that makes sense. The lineups the Mets have used the first three games have made sense. I like that.

    Also the gnashing of teeth by some with these lineups have reminded me of an old bit that comedian Brian Regan did on Opie and Anthony. “This is not what I’m used to, so stop the differentness!” Classic.

  • Metsense

    I also like the concept of the innovative lineup but I am not sure I like the way the personnel are placed in the lineup. I think the manager should get input from the saberheads to assist in the batting matchups, lineup order and fielding positioning. Any possible advantage should always be seeked.The manager should take the knowledge presented and add his own personal touch and adjust it to his players skills because ultimately it is his job on the line.

  • Pete

    Charlie it just alters the dynamics of the game to bat the pitcher 8th to my liking. Instead of having a chance at scoring runs and continue to put the pressure on the opposing pitcher you put the team in mental state of mind of giving up an out. Putting Flores in the 8 hole is bad enough but I can accept that. I would rather have him than any Met pitcher batting with runners in scoring position. You give up too much. You give the opposing pitcher a breather where he knows he doesn’t have to be careful with a mistake pitch. I was taught you put your best hitter in the 3 hole and your best OBP to lead off. We’ll just have to hope for the best. Besides you’re right. So long as they win. That’s what’s most important.

    • TexasGusCC

      Pete, that’s how I know it too.

      By putting a pitcher #8, you are shortening your lineup the first time through. And after all, by the sixth inning you are pinch hitting anyway, so if a pitcher gets two at bats, why have 50% of them be a detriment? If he has had three atbats but the sixth, then that very nice. But rare.

      Also, a good hitting pitcher is still a pitcher hitting. Which Mets pitcher is a better hitter than Flores? Or TDA? Not one.

  • Pete

    Granderson leading off is not utilizing a player’s strengths. If we’re expecting 20-25 home runs I would rather see the home runs with runners on base. I know it’s only the first inning he’s leading off with no one on base. Still that OBP or lack of is what has me scratching my head. I thought a lefty-righty line up would force opposing managers to go deeper into their bull pen. I was also thinking that Lagares would continue to grow in the lead off spot like Pagan eventually did in San Francisco.

  • Matt Netter

    I’m curious to see the lineup vs lefties.

  • James Preller

    Off-Topic: On the Torres debut, it’s hard to pitch when you’re ducking.

    Hopefully that new helmet-hat comes in soon.

  • Joe F

    MSM? I hate that lame term and it is even less applicable in this case because the blogosphere was equally infatuated with the line up construction, so it wasn’t a media driven thing so much as it was a reaction by all parties who follow the Mets. As much, if not more ink spilled about this issue on the blogs, as evidenced by…..umm, this post?

  • James Preller

    Good comment, Joe. The lineup moved Murphy out of his normal #2 slot, slid our traditional #3 hitter into the 2 spot, moved Granderson up to leadoff after Juan Lagares tore up Spring Training in that spot, while the manager talked about experimenting with batting the pitcher 8th.

    Moreover, TC did not exactly prepare us for those changes, so it came as a bit of a shock in game one. Batting the pitcher 8th in game 2 — while monumentally idiotic — at least came as no surprise; it was the dumb thing we expected them to do.

    It would have been remiss to ignore all that. Yes, the FAN-type folks got hysterical and overwrought, but otherwise I thought most folks discussed it semi-thoughtfully.

    As my pal Mike texted me, word is that tonight’s lineup came to Tim Teufel in a dream on 1/26/15.

  • Rob Rogan

    My reaction to the lineup on OD was “Huh, that’s interesting. LGM!”

    I mean really, beyond the pitcher hitting 8th (stop the madness), there’s nothing inherently appalling about it. I mean, you could even see the logic in the placement even if you didn’t agree with it.

    Hopefully the Mets are successful enough this season to put this type of crap to bed, Charlie. It’s beyond tiring at this point.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 100 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here