|
06 August 2010
As if Mets v. Phillies wasn't fun enough, here's some quotes from Adam Martino regarding the two teams:
This is what characterizes the Phillies of this era, and what separates them from the Mets:
Swagger. Arrogance. Condescension toward opponents.
Woah there partner, where did that come from? The Phillies and Mets really haven't had to many problems this year. That was a cheap shot! Don't mistake our confidence for arrogance.
Then it keeps rolling, and there is talk that the Mets and Phillies are basically the same team, but...
It all adds up to a "(expletive) you" edge that the Mets lack. From the general manager to the coaching staff to the star players to Chris Carter and Jesus Feliciano, they are almost all nice people. Maybe too nice.
So the Phillies have been winning with dirtbags and sleezeballs? Ridiculous. Okay, that's not his point, but it's a tough rap regardless.
The collective personalities of both clubs are clear, and in direct contrast with one another. Wounded by divisional collapses in 2007 and 2008, the Mets lack a cocky culture of winning. This weekend, they will field a team comparable in talent to the Phillies, and filled with people you might rather have dinner with. And, sadly for the Mets, that is part of their problem.
Before I can respond to this, let's defer to a man smarter than I, Craig Calcaterra:
At the heart of this article -- like so many other article analyzing the Mets' recent failures -- is a fallacy: that the Mets are as talented as the Phillies have been over the past few years. They're simply not.
The Phillies have not gone into any season over the past three years with the kinds of black holes in the lineup like the Mets have had in right field and second base or the kinds of nearly season-long injuries like those to Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes last year (and into this year). At the same time, the Mets don't have a single pitcher close to Roy Halladay's quality (sorry Johan) or a position player as good as Chase Utley (sorry David Wright). Add in the fact that their manager can't hold a candle to Charlie Manuel and the notion that all that separates these two teams is likability or swagger is laughable in the extreme.
It's a comforting idea I suppose -- we'd win if only we weren't so nice! -- but it's hogwash. Baseball rewards intensity and emotional demeanor less so than any other sport. The games are too long. The season is too long. Calm calculation is just too important. Attitude can only take you so far.
Ultimately, winning baseball is about talent and execution. The Mets could fill a wagon with swagger and it wouldn't do them a damn bit of good. Because the Phillies are just better.
I apologize to Craig for stealing his entire thought, but it was too refreshing not to. If you don't read his regular stuff at Hardball Talk you are a fool, because he is the best out there. The Phillies are winning 1-0 as we speak, Mets suck.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
