There are two choices for 4. The first is Ron Swoboda, who was a key contributor to the 1969 Mets World Series victory:
However, my choice for Magic Man Number 4 will be Lenny Dykstra:
I chose Dykstra mostly because I got to see him play. I chose him because he was amazing in the 1986 postseason.
In the NLCS, he hit .304/.360/.565. He hit a walk off two run homerun in Game 3 of the NLCS to give the Mets a 6-5 win. He got the Game 6 ninth inning rally started with a leadoff triple. Everyone who watched this NLCS discuss the importance of winning in six with NLCS MVP Mike Scott scheduled to pitch Game 7.
In the World Series, Dykstra hit .296/.345/.519. Strangely enough, Dykstra was so big in big games that this was his worst ever postseason series. Dykstra lead off Game 3 in Boston with a homerun. This was important as the Mets came to Boston after losing the first two at Shea.
When Dykstra did all of this, he was only 23 years old. It shows that it’s not an issue of experience come October. Rather, it’s an issue of who has ice water running through their veins. This is important to keep in mind because the Mets run largely rests with their young pitching.
The young pitching has met every challenge thus far. As Dykstra shows us, they will meet the challenges they face en route to the World Series.
Sounds absurd doesn’t it? Michael Conforto has exceeded everyone’s expectations this year. He’s been a huge part of the team. However, he’s been used strictly as a platoon player. It’s probably because he’s hitting .167/.231/.167 against lefties this year, albeit in only 13 plate appearances.
Normally, this wouldn’t be an issue, but the Dodgers will be starting three lefties in the NLDS. If Clayton Kershaw starts Games 1 & 5, that means Conforto won’t start in four of the five NLDS games. I don’t think the Mets will prep Conforto for the lefties either. On clinch day, the Reds had a lefty on the mound, and Conforto was the only lefty who wasn’t in the lineup.
The question that arises is what use can Conforto be as a bench player? Even with his surprising defensive ability, he’s not a late inning defensive replacement; that’s Juan Lagares‘ job. That leaves him for pinch hitting and double switch and pinch hitting duties.
You could argue that role may be better left to Kirk Nieuwenhuis, who can play CF, or Eric Campbell, who’s right handed. Campbell is also versatile, which could be useful after the Juan Uribe injury. Both Nieuwenhuis and Campbell are also more accustomed to being bench players that sit for long stretches at a time.
However, this neglects Conforto’s limited work as a bench player. Conforto has hit .333/.429/.500 in seven plate appearances as a pinch hitter. Also, he’s just a better player than Nieuwenhuis and Campbell. When you’re selecting your playoff roster, you want your best players on the roster, even if they’re not going to play as much as they should.
However, if he’s left off the roster I’m not going to take issue. Anytime a player is potentially not going to play four out of five games, there should be a discussion whether there’s a player available who can better serve the team.
I just don’t think there is a better player than Michael Conforto.
I think it is helpful to use the Cy Young guidelines when selecting each leagues top relievers. There are some other things I will consider.
I will consider both set-up men and closers. However, I will give slightly more weight to closers. We have seen time and time again there are players that have been terrific set-up men become shaky closers. Additionally, there should be weight to innings pitched. The more innings you play, the more important you are to a team.
Overall, my hope is to choose the best overall relievers whether or not they are closers.
It’s an off-day, but that doesn’t mean you can’t work on your Wilmer Flores cheers. This one is useful because at a game you might have something in your hand at a game:
In 1969, the Mets had a platoon at third base with the rookie left handed batter Wayne Garrett and our Magic Man Number 5 Ed Charles:
The Glider was a good major league player for the Kansas City Athletics and the New York Mets. His major league debut was the same year as the Mets first ever season. His last ever game was Game 5 of the 1969 World Series. He went out a winner.
His last year reminds me of the current Michael Conforto–Michael Cuddyer situation. The older player takes a step back to let the better, younger player shine. It helped lead the Mets to a World Series in 1969. Hopefully, the Mets will win it all again this year.
Lets Go Mets!
Now, I’m on the record as not thinking Homefield is an advantage to the Mets. Overall, I think the Mets may be better served by stating the NLDS in Los Angeles. However, I am excited to see the Mets go for it.
Also, I have to admit I am excited at the idea of seeing Citi Field rocking for its first playoff game. Also, I had a lot of fun doing the Magic Number countdown for the divisional title. Unlike the last time, I am not focusing on the bad players on bad years. Mets fans are celebrating.
Instead, I’m focusing on Mets who have won the World Series because that’s the goal. I can’t truly focus on players I’ve seen because I wasn’t born in 1969, and I was too young to completely remember 1986.
Normally, the magic number is calculated by determining the point in which a team obtains its goal outright. Because the Mets win the season series against the Dodgers, the Mets only need to have the same exact record as the Dodgers.
Homefield Magic Number: 5
Overall, I think the criteria I would look at in voting for a Rookie of the Year is similar to the criteria to the MVP Award. To sum up, I will be looking at the following:
- The total amount of games played;
- The total value of the player (offense, defense, character); and
- Pitchers may be considered for the award.
However, to me that’s not enough. I believe the Rookie of the Year is a delicate balance between who played the best and who’s the best player. How much weight do you place on games played and how effective a player plays in those games?
I think test is Bob Hamelin over Manny Ramirez and the 1994 Rookie of the Year Award. Sure, by some measures Hamelin had a better year, but even then, we knew Manny was the better player. It looks wrong, but the result might’ve been right. Personally, I probably would’ve voted for Hamelin, but I would’ve changed my mind several times right up to the deadline.
I can tell you the AL ROY race is the main reason I’m still holding onto my ballot right now. I just hope I make the right decision.
I’ve been one of the few who defended Matt Harvey. One of the reasons was because he was doing what he needed to do to pitch in the playoffs and not ruin his career.
The backlash was insane. People were calling for the Mets to cut him. Some wanted him traded for cents on the dollar. Most said they could never forgive him. There were discussions on what Harvey needed to do to gain back the fans trust. By the way, this just wasn’t fans, it was also the media. It seems it was also his teammates, which I just don’t understand.
Last Sunday against the Yankees he was dominant for five innings before getting lifted. When the bullpen blew it, the fans went after Harvey. These same people were awful quiet yesterday. They cheered and praised Harvey for pitching into the sixth.
I’m just happy he proved me right. Harvey considered the clincher to be an important game, and he went deep into the game. Terry Collins wanted to take him out after six, but Harvey said no. He needed the extra inning to get ready for the playoffs. Harvey showed he’s going to do what he needs to get ready for the playoffs.
Matt Harvey doesn’t owe us an apology. He did what he said he was going to do. If anything, he deserves the apology.
