Saturday, October 21, 2006

History Lesson

I keep trying to leave comments on other people's blogs that turn out long enough to be a post here, so here goes with thoughts I was gonna leave on Peter's page.

An argument started in the comments section here, and at the risk of annoying Peter, or making him think I'm not on his side, I'll respond here to him saying that, "...and the '86 Mets..they were a good team, but far from the best." I think it's way off base and here's why:

The Mets won 108 games and were prohibitive favorites going into the '86 series...clearly the best team in the league all year. The '67 Cards (101 wins), the '75 Reds (108 wins) and the '86 Mets all won the most games of any team in their league for their respective decades...not only were the Mets the class of '86, no other NL team won more than 108 games during all of the '80's, so it's a lock to say that they were the best team of that decade. And not only that, but the '86 Mets and the '75 Reds won more games in a season than any National League team since the 1909 Pittsburgh Pirates, winners of a 110 games, so it's safe to say that, at least in the regular season, the '86 Mets were historically good. That whole '86 series was poorly played and managed. Davey Johnson and Johnny Mac just went into brain freeze for two weeks. The Mets ended up being good enough to expose a suspect bullpen and poor team defense and base running, and Hurst just ran out of gas. Should the Sox have put that series away? Yeah, and they could have done it in five games. But they didn't. All this talk this post season of "Did the better team win?" and '86 is a clear example of a year when yes, the better team won, just as the better team won in '67 and '75. For the Red Sox to even take those series the distance was unexpected at that time. Now 2003, the better team DID NOT win the ALCS. But when it comes to the Series, the Sox have had the unenviable challenge of bumping into the best team of the decade. Even in '04, the Cardinals had a better record: 105-57, so it's conceivable and even highly probable that they'll end up with the winningest season of this decade. That team proved not to be the better team, despite having the better record. Thus endeth the lesson. But I will say, Peter, that anonymous posters drive me batty, too.


Blogger Peter N said...

"The better team won in '67 and '75.."
But not the team that stole my heart, lock stock and barrel....... it was sadness, complete and utter, in '75 and '67....disbelief in '86. P.S. THEY BLEW IT!!!!!! Huge difference. Feel better, everyone in your household. This World Series is for enjoyment only...not a heartstring- pulling victory or loss.

4:28 PM  
Blogger Peter N said...

Comment moderation? Wow...huge step....not on my blog..ever...takes away the spontneity (did I spell that right? Nope)

4:29 PM  
Blogger MattySox said...

Comment moderation is off...I thought that was how you could delete comments like those stupid spammy ones I got...apparently's cool now.

Separately, I don't see how you were in disbelief in '86...I was only 10, but even then I was surprised we got through the Angels, then got the Mets on the ropes as we did...of course I was crushed with Game 6, and blowing the lead in game 7 was bad, but even then I was surprised at the season we had. We were 81-81 in '85, so, at least to a kid, just getting to the WS was amazing...I still say the Mets beat us...we didn't blow it. Johnny Mac made some terrible decisions (how does Baylor not get into game 6 at all?), but in the end, they got the hits, nobody was gonna beat Mookie to first, and Strawberry hit a moonshot, and Rice was the worst post-season baserunner ever...worse than Suppan in '04. So there. Whatever.

12:05 AM  
Blogger Peter N said...

You are SO exactly right. I wasn't in disbelief. It's just that I was comparing the '67 Cardinals, with one of the best pitchers who ever was and ever will be, Bob Gibson, who threw three (!) complete games in the seven game series, and the "75 Cinn. Reds, the Big Red (ugly) Machine, and the '86 Mets. In '67, we were the underdogs to even make it to the post-season...but we did. And we went a tough seven games against Mr. Gibson and his team. In '75, we were up against a singular team...and a too talented one. And again we went seven strong never say die games. And then there was 1986. Both teams were great...the Mets superlative. And we both know what happened....I was at a favorite bar for game 6, and was moved beyond belief when what happened, well, happened! The final outcome is written in my soul. Hope that helps. Thank you for the link. As always, you're the best. Enjoy game two...maybe the Tigers found the oil the Tin Man used in The Wizard Of Oz...they needed it last night. Hi to your family, too. Peter. Love ya!

P.S. You are so right...Mookie would have been safe even if Stapes had fielded the ball cleanly, sadly to say. Enjoy this Sunday. Stay well!

10:25 AM  
Blogger Michael Leggett said...

& J. Mac let sheer emotion get the better of him, in Game 6-'86WS:

Imagine how it would've sounded if the Game was on FOX;

Please, NO!

9:32 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home