The Mets Are A Natural Disaster

• Cubs 9-Mets 6:

I don't think anyone who's watched the Mets for any significant length of time and has any baseball intelligence at all didn't see what was coming after they failed to score in the bottom

of the ninth inning with a runner at third base and no outs. This is not an isolated incident with the Mets as they find situations in which it's difficult not to score, yet find a way to accomplish the feat. Apparently, the "MVP candidate" David Wright has never heard of the term "shortening your swing based on the situation" because with Daniel Murphy on third base, Wright was hacking away as if he were looking to get his face time on SportsCenter with another walk-off home run instead of simply driving in the winning run with a fly ball. But, that's not why the Mets are the baseball equivalent of a natural disaster.
Like a hurricane or earthquake, there's no judgment or intent to injure; like any natural occurrence, what is simply is. Anyone who knows the Mets knew what was going to happen after they failed to score with that tailor-made opportunity in the bottom of the ninth. Just like the game against the Phillies in which they blew a 7-0 lead and ended up in extra innings, there was no way they were going to come back and win. The situation was such that I stopped watching the game. So confident in the Mets ability to demolish their playoff chances in the most painful way possible and quite likely give up a home run, I went downstairs to empty the dishwasher rather than watch it happen, because I knew what was going to happen and didn't have to watch.
Unlike the writer Stephen A. Smith, who claimed that he "didn't have to" watch the end of a

Jets-Patriots playoff game in January 2007 because, he wanted to imply, his innate football knowledge gave him the foresight to see the future but he was in reality talking out of his posterior, I truly knew what would happen...*

*I have to make a note here about Stephen A. Smith. As much as I rip him for his lack of even the most basic knowledge of baseball and football (he didn't know which team was in which division during his ill-fated TV show on ESPN), I read his column in ESPN the Magazine and the man's a very good, talented writer; skilled with the language, coherent and well-organized.

...because of that, after emptying my dishwasher, I walked back upstairs, looked at the TV

and saw Derrek Lee standing on second base, that the score was 7-6 and with Aramis Ramirez at the plate said, "Uh oh"; seconds later Ramirez deposited a Luis Ayala pitch into the left field bleachers to effectively end the game right there and then.
This isn't a function of any collapse; it's just the Mets being the Mets; being the thing that they are with no other definition necessary; whether or not they pull themselves out of this is another aspect of the Mets. As a franchise, they've fought out of worse situations than this (1973, 1986, 1999); and they've stumbled under the weight of themselves (1988, 1998, 2006, 2007). Which version they'll be this time will be discovered in the coming days, but no one who knows the team can feign surprise, because this is the Mets, for better or worse.

• Brewers 4-Pirates 2:

I'd suggest putting the brakes on the idea that these two wins against the Pirates (and

three in a row overall) have righted the Brewers sinking ship. C.C. Sabathia is showing far more courage than his body can handle and these taxing starts on three-days rest are going to haunt him in the coming years if he's not careful.*

*One note about pitchers. I contend that it's not the number of pitches per se that are causing the injuries, but when the pitcher gets physically tired, loses his leg drive and proper mechanics and deviates from throwing properly and as stress-free as possible, thereby overtaxing his arm and getting hurt; and Sabathia, while in shape for baseball, isn't exactly a bastion of physical fitness; but the Brewers know that they're not keeping him, so what do they really care about what happens with him after 2008?

Watching chunks of these two games made me see how bad the Pirates really are. I would be deeply concerned with the new management team because in addition to this embarrassing tete-a-tete betwen Scott Boras and team president Frank Coonelly as to whether or not Pedro Alvarez agreed to a deal or not, the deals that GM Neal Huntington

made at the trading deadline to shed the remaining marketable veterans on the Pirates roster are getting a horrible review in the short-term.
In dealing Xavier Nady and Damaso Marte to the Yankees as part of one deal, the return had to be equal or better than what they would've gotten if they'd dealt both separately. With both players being in heavy demand and playing positions that were desperate needs for so many teams, the Pirates have to hope that Jose Tabata regains his lost luster as a prospect; that Dan McCutchen develops (and he's about to turn 26, a bit too old to be a "prospect"); that maybe the talented Ross Ohlendorf can become a useful pitcher as a starter or reliever (I'd make him a starter); and realize that Jeff Karstens is a soft-tossing journeyman. The return on that deal looks weak.
Then there was the three-way deal in which Jason Bay ended up with the Red Sox and

Manny Ramirez on the Dodgers. Andy LaRoche (whom I'm convinced the Pirates were as interested in the marketing ability of uniting him with his brother on the corners of their diamond as they were a cornerstone to their rebuilding project) has looked overmatched at the plate and clueless in the field. Brandon Moss and Craig Hanson have talent, so they may end up as useful pieces; and young Bryan Morris is at least three years away from the big leagues. The fact that the Dodgers gave up on LaRoche so quickly would be a red flag for me because the Dodgers development people have the results to indicate they know what they're doing and even though they were getting a star like Manny, wouldn't have just dumped a player they had as high an opinion of as everyone else seemed to as was the situation with LaRoche.
In essence, that Pirates lineup isn't at all scary, so the Brewers should be beating them.

Now tonight will be a major test because they've activated Yovani Gallardo to take the start. Gallardo was supposed to miss the entire season with a knee injury, but has returned. The Brewers don't have much of a choice than to try Gallardo (unless they want to put Sabathia out there again), but I'd question what kind of performance they're going to get from him (his numbers in his minor league rehab starts weren't very good), and they're not going to be able to get him too deeply into the game, which will put things in the hands of that awful bullpen.

• Will the Mets recover from this? Will the Brewers seize their opportunity? And how will the weather forecasts in New York affect everything?

It's a four game season now with everything all even. The game tonight will depend on whether or not the Mets score some runs early and get a decent performance from Pedro Martinez. The fans and media grasp tightly to what happened

the day before more than the players do. Once the game starts, there's not going to be any "what-if?" lamenting on the part of the players. They might try a little too hard with runners in scoring position; they might hold their collective breaths when the bullpen enters the game, but it won't be as a direct result of one game.
With the Brewers beating up on the Pirates, it has to be remembered that they're going to play the Cubs this weekend and while Cubs manager Lou Piniella is being prudent with his players, he's also managing the games to win. That they're going from playing one contender in New York to Milwaukee also adds into that equation because Piniella's not going to give the Brewers an easy time after the way his team battled against the Mets. The Brewers "recovery" from their dreadful slump will be judged by how they play this weekend.
The weather forecasts in New York are also very important. It's supposed to rain all weekend to the point that the games are in jeopardy. The media is suggesting that the possibility of rainouts and doubleheaders are a disadvantage for the Mets, but I see it the opposite way. If the Brewers are forced to play while the Mets are sitting in their clubhouse playing cards, the pressure will revert to the Brewers. Add in that the Cubs----knowing that if tonight's game is rained out, there's a very real possibility of having to play a makeup game in

New York on Monday to decide who's going to the playoffs----are going to do everything possible to avoid that and play as hard as they can to eliminate the Brewers if necessary actually gives the Mets an advantage. And at this point, I don't think the Mets would refuse any divine intervention to get them into the playoffs because what they're doing on the field isn't working, so maybe if they sit around and watch the Brewers implode, they'll have more success. They can't do much worse than they have in the past two Septembers if they're not playing. Mets manager Jerry Manuel's a spiritual guy, raising his arms to the sky and saying, "Let it rain!!!" wouldn't be such a bad idea since they've tried just about everything else.

Managing Gutlessly And To Lose

• Brewers 6-Pirates 5:

One of the reasons that Tony La Russa has been such a successful manager over the long

term is that he isn't a slave to the supposed "book" that he's blamed for co-authoring. The push-button, computerized managerial handbook that exists only for those that aren't confident enough in their baseball savvy or are too paranoid to make a risky decision because it's just easier to explain to geniuses in the media and meddlesome owners why he did something that appeared to be correct, but didn't work.
La Russa, as much as he plays percentages, rolls the dice more than people realize. He's earned the right to chafe at having those decisions questioned by the press, but he's not making his moves based on safety-first because he's always been the same type of manager from when he took over the White Sox in 1979 at age 34, as he is now managing the Cardinals at age 63. I still remember one incident when there was an insider's profile on La Russa and he was being recorded as he managed; a young pitcher had just been recalled and it was a clear bunting situation, but La Russa called to the bullpen and just as the pitcher settled into the batter's box, La Russa asked urgently, "Can he hit?" after receiving the response which, presumably, was that they didn't know, La Russa said, "Well, he's swingin' now." I don't know what happened in the at bat, but how many managers would have had the nerve to pull something like that with a pitcher about whom they had no clue? The point to all of this is to illustrate the difference between a Hall of Fame manager like La Russa and what I was watching last night as the

Brewers and Pirates held a managerial screw-up convention.
There were so many bizarre decisions made last night that they have to be compartmentalized. The decision of when and with whom to bunt shouldn't be all that hard especially for guys like Brewers manager Dale Sveum and Pirates manager John Russell, who played the game as fringe big leaguers and had to do everything they could to maintain a spot on the roster; and have also managed in the minor leagues.
First, there were the bunt plays. To me, getting a leadoff batter on and then bunting him to second is an iffy proposition unless the pitcher or a notoriously weak hitter is batting. A runner on second base isn't going to score unless one of the next two hitters gets a base hit or something strange happens. Staying out of the potential double-play is a consideration, but that's all the more reason to try something like a hit-and-run instead of ordering a straight sacrifice. In the eighth inning with the Pirates leading 5-4, J.J. Hardy singled to lead off the

inning off of Pirates lefty John Grabow. Right-handed power hitter Corey Hart was batting and manager Sveum had him bunt Hardy to second base. The bunt is an explainable strategy; but to bunt with a batter who has 20 homers and 89 RBI against a lefty pitcher was just overmanaging in a panicky sort of way. Add in that Hart can run and the double play is only likely if he hits the ball right at someone. The bunt was successful and it ended up working because the light-hitting Jason Kendall doubled to tie the game, but it wasn't the right move. The power hitters are there to drive in runs and had Kendall not gotten that clutch, two-out hit, the Brewers would've lost.
Then it was Russell's turn to mess around with an unnecessary bunt. In the top of the ninth, after Nyjer Morgan reached on an infield single, Freddy Sanchez was batting. Sanchez squared around to bunt as if he were a starting pitcher sacrificing the runner to second and

the Brewers were charging in from the corners and shifting their infield all over the place like it was the worst hitting pitcher in history trying to advance the runner. Why is it that managers are so entrenched in what's safe that they don't look at each situation individually? Sanchez is a former batting champion who rarely strikes out; Morgan runs like the wind; why not have him steal as the infield is moving all over the place? Why not have Sanchez square to bunt and chop at the ball to try and dribble it through the infield? Or why not put on a hit and run, having Morgan trying to steal the base as Sanchez chops at the ball? If they'd done that and Sanchez got the ball through the infield, Morgan might've been able to score from first base.
Then there were the pitching decisions. There's no way to give Sveum a hard time for using Guillermo Mota in the eighth inning; he's in the same situation as former Mets manager Willie Randolph was with Mota a year ago as Randolph kept using him despite his failures; the Brewers, like the Mets of 2007, don't have any alternatives other than to use Mota and hope for the best. As for the Pirates, Russell brought in T.J. Beam, a 27-year-old career minor league journeyman

who might one day have some use as a long reliever. After Ryan Braun reached on an infield hit, Prince Fielder was at the plate. Russell walked out to the mound to talk to his pitcher and catcher about how to handle Fielder and with the first two pitches so far outside that it was clear that they wanted nothing to do with Fielder and were hoping that he'd be overanxious and chase a bad pitch, why didn't they just walk him after the second ball? And I don't want to hear about how you don't put the winning run on second base because just before I changed the channel, I saw the winning run score right before Fielder jumped into the circle of teammates waiting at home plate to greet him after his game-winning homer landed in the right-center field bleachers. I don't know about you, but I like the Beam-J.J. Hardy matchup better than I like seeing Beam throw anything anywhere close to the strike zone for Fielder to handle.
Of course it's easier to make the safety-first moves like bunting runners into scoring position or refusing to walk a winning run into scoring position, but that doesn't make it right for the manager or team to be so weak-minded that they're going to let concerns about what's going to be said about them dictate what decisions they make, even if the opposite of what they did would've been correct. They may have lost or won anyway, but that doesn't validate gutless, simple-minded adherence to a non-existent book of maneuvers.

• Brewers should not pitch C.C. Sabathia again on short-rest, and Sabathia shouldn't agree to it:

Moving C.C. Sabathia up to pitch on three-days rest for the second time in a row is an

understandable decision given the Brewers current predicament, their porous starting pitching and the injury to Ben Sheets, but Sabathia should think of himself as well as the team; and the Brewers should look at their situation and decide that one pitcher isn't going to be able to carry them through the post-season no matter how dominant he's been.
Sabathia is clearly tired. His stuff in his last two starts wasn't as sharp as it was since the trade to the Brewers and he has to, at some point, consider his own situation before risking injury as he's weeks before untold millions in free agency. To go out to the mound and run on fumes and guts to help save a sinking ship is admirable, but there comes a point where there are diminishing returns. Are the Brewers going to pay Sabathia if he gets hurt helping them try and save a playoff spot? They've squeezed every single pitch they possibly can out of the big lefty knowing that they're not going to have him after the season and Sabathia isn't the type to out-and-out say that he's concerned about his personal future at the expense of his current team's goals; but he should at least consider it before running this risk of overtaxing such a valuable commodity as his left arm.
The Brewers have to accept the fact that they're going to need to get winning performances from more than one starting pitcher if they're going to get to the playoffs. What good does it do to have Sabathia go out to the mound tired, diminish his stuff and get him at less than 100%, only to have to use one of their other pitchers in the coming days? They have to win

after tonight one way or the other, why weaken the one strength out of desperation?
Sabathia and the Brewers have manhandled the Pirates this year and that Pirates lineup isn't exactly intimidating, but that's all the more reason to give Sabathia his full rest and pitch him on Thursday; add in that Paul Maholm is a pretty good pitcher and there's a real chance that the game's going to be close and Sabathia won't be able to pitch late into the game due to exhaustion; the Brewers bullpen will again be called upon to record key outs either way. It's a bad move all the way around, no matter what happens.

• Yankees 3-Blue Jays 1:

Is the Blue Jays front office seeing reality yet? The reality that without the ten-game win streak in early September, they're a .500 team? That Scott Rolen has been a disaster while

Troy Glaus is closing in on 100 RBI? That a team who has hot streaks once any chance of contention is gone is not a good team? That they're an also-ran year-after-year? Or are they going to move forward in a difficult decision with the same strategy and expect a different result?
Anyone home? Hello?

• Twins 9-White Sox 3:

I understand what White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen was doing when he issued a media-delivered challenge to last night's starter Javier Vazquez. Among other things, Guillen said

Vazquez "hasn't been" a big game pitcher in his career. Guillen's off-the-wall rants are largely a matter of design in the hopes of making his players angry enough that they perform with a greater determination to prove him wrong; the problem is that these types of psychological ploys don't always work with certain personalities. Vazquez isn't the type of guy who seems to like having people screaming in his face.
In fairness to Guillen, Vazquez hasn't been very good in the few opportunities he's had to pitch in important games, but that doesn't justify hanging that reputation around his neck right before he's making a very important start against the closest division competitor to the White Sox on the road in Minnesota. These allegations are ignored by some players; taken as a challenge to others; and used as a reason to go out and perform timidly and badly by some who just don't like being challenged that way. Part of being a successful all-around manager is being able to read the players and respond to what they specifically need to perform; Guillen is a successful manager, but he misread his player in this case. Vazquez might've gotten shelled anyway, but Guillen's comments certainly didn't help.

• Rangers 6-Athletics 4:
  

No matter how the Rangers end this season, why do I get the feeling that team president, the cold, deliberating and ruthless Nolan Ryan is out in the shed sharpening his axe?